# "Community Specification" (a spec for specs created by communities)

**URL:** <https://farmos.discourse.group/t/community-specification-a-spec-for-specs-created-by-communities/2415>\
**Category:** Conventions\
**Created:** [September 8, 2025, 4:21pm UTC](https://farmos.discourse.group/t/community-specification-a-spec-for-specs-created-by-communities/2415 "2025-09-08T16:21:18Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jgaehring](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/farmos.discourse.group/jgaehring/32/927_2.png) [@jgaehring](https://farmos.discourse.group/u/jgaehring)\
**Post date:** [September 8, 2025, 4:21pm UTC](https://farmos.discourse.group/t/community-specification-a-spec-for-specs-created-by-communities/2415/1 "2025-09-08T16:21:18Z")

</div>

Is anyone here familiar with this “Community Specification”?

> **[GitHub - CommunitySpecification/Community\_Specification: Community Specification 1.0](https://github.com/CommunitySpecification/Community_Specification)**
>
> Community Specification 1.0

As stated in the README:

> The Community Specification process is a repository-based approach for creating standards and specifications in version control systems, such as Git.

I found it via some [side chatter](https://bsky.app/profile/lu.is/post/3ly6wf3eh4s2e) around Bluesky [beginning the process](https://connectedplaces.leaflet.pub/3ly3zwysa4s2j) to make their ATProtocol an [IETF standard](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bofreq-newbold-authenticated-transfer/) and related [drama between ATProto & ActivityPub communities](https://writings.thisismissem.social/statement-on-discourse-about-activitypub-and-at-protocol/). It’s fascinating how all that stuff is playing out (even if it’s hard to tease apart the minutiae of the debates and internal rivalries), and at least _vaguely_ relevant to farmOS conventions, or standards creation in general, if only as a cautionary tale.

But above all, the Community Specification struck me as the takeaway most relevant to the farmOS community, perhaps as a way to _avoid_ some of that drama (the implication seemed to be that Bluesky is _not_ using its process or its license; dunno about ActivityPub). The issue of licensing the specification for community development seemed especially pertinent, with some important considerations about how that process should differ from the way code or other creative works are typically licensed (i.e., w/o certain patent considerations etc). Anywho, the whole thing was new to me and seemed like a great resource, so figured I’d share!