Consider adding actual code of spec example somewhere in Readme

[matkoniecz]

https://github.com/Fission-AI/OpenSpec/#see-it-in-action has "See it in action" but actual spec powering this example are not seen anywhere

personally I am curious whether it is better than my current approach (presumably less structure instructions in markdown file(s)) - so I am curious how OpenSpec persistent prompt/specs/however you call it actually look like

maybe link specs of openspec if you use it on this repo?

[clay-good]

Thanks for raising this @matkoniecz — you're right, the README showed the workflow creating specs/ but never what a spec actually contains.

I've opened PR #1365 to fix it.

It adds a collapsible "What do the specs actually look like?" block right after the "See it in action" walkthrough, with a short example spec (requirements + WHEN/THEN scenarios in plain Markdown). And since OpenSpec is built with OpenSpec, it also links to this repo's own live openspec/specs and in-flight openspec/changes — real specs at scale, exactly as you suggested.

[clay-good]

Done, and you were right about the gap: "See it in action" showed specs/ being created and then never showed what lands in them.

The README now has a "What do the specs actually look like?" block right after that walkthrough, with a real requirement and a WHEN/THEN scenario in plain Markdown: README.md.

It also does the thing you actually suggested. OpenSpec is built with OpenSpec, so the block links this repo's live openspec/specs and in-flight openspec/changes. Real specs at scale, dogfood included.

Shipped in #1365. Closing as resolved.