a) It seems that the expectation is that most vocab fields would start out as open, and later be closed if we gain implementation/deployment experience with them. Keeping the two types essentially the same feels like this might smooth the process. (But maybe it's just "hard" anyway).
b) It's not clear that an additional suggested vocabulary item can be added to an open-vocab safely; but given they're entirely unvalidated perhaps this doesn't matter.
Note that both these points aren't relevant to the MVP, per se - they're to do with maintaining interoperability during the evolution of the MVP subsequent to production deployment. Smooth upgrades are always desirable.
a) It seems that the expectation is that most vocab fields would start out as open, and later be closed if we gain implementation/deployment experience with them. Keeping the two types essentially the same feels like this might smooth the process. (But maybe it's just "hard" anyway).
b) It's not clear that an additional suggested vocabulary item can be added to an open-vocab safely; but given they're entirely unvalidated perhaps this doesn't matter.
Note that both these points aren't relevant to the MVP, per se - they're to do with maintaining interoperability during the evolution of the MVP subsequent to production deployment. Smooth upgrades are always desirable.