Add some clarification, refs #48

20th/README.md

@@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
 # 20th anniversary article authors.
 
-Every article will pick one (or several) RFCs from [here](https://raku.org/archive/rfc/by-group.html), pay homage to the author, and write up a short example or examples of how they ended up being implemented in current day Raku. 
+Every article will pick one (or several) RFCs from [here](https://raku.org/archive/rfc/by-group.html), pay homage to the author, and write up a short example or examples of how they ended up being implemented in current day Raku.
+
+In that page, the RFCs are organized by groups; those that are *developing* simply were not finished. The retracted ones were finally retired, and those that are marked as *frozen* are finished, and might or might not have resulted in a specific feature. RFCs were eventually merged in the [synopsis](https://design.raku.org/), but it would be interesting, anyway, to understand the path of feature from a RFC to become eventually part of the implementation.
+
+For example, let's look at [RFC32](https://raku.org/archive/rfc/32.html), which requests "foreign objects". It's pretty much an extension of the Perl XS mechanism. That RFC is white, thus "in development", but that eventually was implemented as NativeCall. The article should refer to that RFC, try and find out about its author, Dan Sugalski, and eventually show a few examples of how they were implemented in Raku.
 
 You can also choose some that weren't implemented, and what happened to them. The emphasis is on people that helped craft Raku the way it is now, and how the process was democratic and inclusive.