Hey theamk, thanks for the in-depth comment. > it's highly likely it will only ever have one implementation Yes, many implementations is the intent. > very b

Hey theamk, thanks for the in-depth comment. > it's highly likely it will only ever have one implementation Yes, many implementations is the intent. > very basic types, and an extensible metadata system I would argue DBUF does satisfy this statement. The symbols compose in a way that separates the structure from the meaning. A parser doesn't need to know what a quaternion is, it would only see it as a map with 4 fields. If a parser understands the first 16 symbols in the registry, it can parse any message. All other symbols are encoded in a predetermined way. I'd appreciate any thoughts on how the docs are not making those concepts clear.