↳ In-reply-to » @falsifian You are totally right. The specs are at least "open enough" for us to consider that as an implementation detail. We, and by we I mean @movq @lyse @bender @xuu and others should discuss this in more detail I believe and try to see if we can agree on what we're trying to solve.

@prologic@twtxt.net Thanks for the honor, but I’m not sure why I specifically should be part of a deciding committee here. :-D I get it, I just fear people might misunderstand your message here.

I have to read up on the twtxt registry documentation on the weekend (too tired at the moment), but it should probably be no real issue to integrate that API into yarnd.