Contribution Process
PTI evolves through contributions from implementers, researchers, institutions, and community members. This process applies to RFCs, conformance tests, governance documents, and non-normative guides such as Build Your Own PTI.
Who may contribute
Any participant MAY contribute without organizational membership or commercial relationship to the founding steward. Employers SHOULD be disclosed when contributions affect competitive areas.
Contribution types
| Type | Path | Review |
|---|---|---|
| RFC draft or revision | RFC repository PR | Maintainers + Reviewers + boards |
| Conformance test | Test suite PR | Conformance Program Board |
| Governance doc | This section PR | Maintainers + WG notice |
| Errata | Issue + minimal PR | Maintainer triage |
| Implementation report | Published artifact linked in RFC | Informative for Stable promotion |
Step-by-step: RFC contribution
1. Problem statement
Before large drafts, contributors SHOULD open a public issue containing:
- Problem and affected roles (producer, consumer, subject)
- Proposed scope and non-goals
- Compatibility assessment (additive vs breaking)
- Related RFCs
2. Draft authoring
- Use required RFC fields
- Include testable Conformance subsection with proposed test IDs
- Reference RFC-010 for schema changes
3. Pull request
PRs MUST:
- State target RFC status
- Link issue and meeting discussion if applicable
- Pass automated checks (formatting, link validation, schema lint where configured)
4. Review
Reviewers SHOULD evaluate per Governance Principles. Maintainers MUST allow minimum comment periods from RFC Process.
5. Promotion
Status changes MUST NOT be self-merged by sole author unless Maintainer. Promotion MUST appear in WG minutes.
Licensing and IP
Normative contributions (RFC text, normative test assertions) MUST be submitted under royalty-free terms granting the ecosystem perpetual rights to publish, modify, and redistribute for standardization purposes.
Contributors MUST confirm:
- They have authority to grant license from their employer if applicable
- Known patents directly reading on contributed normative claims are disclosed
Contributors SHOULD seek independent legal counsel; the Working Group does not provide legal advice.
Code of conduct
All participants MUST adhere to Community Participation standards. Maintainers MAY restrict participation for sustained harassment or bad-faith disruption.
Documentation contributions
Non-RFC documentation (implementation guides, comparisons) SHOULD:
- Clearly label normative vs informative content
- Cross-link authoritative RFCs rather than duplicating requirements
- Avoid vendor-specific requirements unless labeled as product documentation
Recognition
RFC authors and significant reviewers SHOULD be credited in change logs. Organizational logos MUST NOT appear on normative RFC pages without trademark policy compliance.
Getting started
| Goal | Resource |
|---|---|
| Understand architecture | RFC-001 |
| Build a compatible system | Build Your Own PTI |
| Run self-assessment | Conformance tests |
| Ask implementation questions | Working Group office hours |