Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
not so. 2822 can be advanced in grade without revising it. I think it
would also be reasonable to publish a separate list of errata and
declare 2822 + that list to be a draft standard, though I don't know
whether IESG would go along with that.
I think that would be needlessly annoying to implementors. Reading errata
lists is frustrating and time-consuming. If someone is going to do all
the work required to produce the errata list, why not incorporate it into
the document and just publish the revised document?
--
Russ Allbery (rra(_at_)stanford(_dot_)edu)
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>