[aprssig] Information organization

[Steve Dimse]

On Feb 17, 2022, at 3:31 PM, Dana Myers <k6jq at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Where's the harm in N people writing their own version of an O'Reilly book on the APRS
> protocol? Each of these is likely to expose useful information, ambiguities, areas to clarify
> and confirmation of areas that are well-specified.

There is no harm in doing it and keeping it to yourself. Someone who does this could be of great value later in the process. But this was done for the public and with encouragement for others to participate.
> 
> As long as no one claims to be replacing the APRS specification, I don't see the value in
> discouraging such participation.
> 
The problem is when it is done publicly, and especially in a public collaboration. A non-trivial amount of what is on aprs.org and other places about APRS is wrong, including some stuff already in this document. Making wrong information easier to find is indeed potentially harmful.

Steve K4HG