Dave
Correct. Thanks for reading my intentions. It does work the more times I
read it.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:32 AM Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
wrote:
On 7/22/2020 5:23 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
In the paragraph Dave edited, I for some reason find the word "that" as
feeling out of place. I need to read it a few more times.
Just to confirm, I assume you mean:
> This working group will conduct that limited review and revision, ...
I was trying to preserve as much of the original text as I could and
didn't even think about this. In context it works, given the paragraph
that precedes it. But it certainly isn't essential. Also, it's worth
making the paragraph stand on its own.
So, perhaps...
This working group will conduct a limited review and revision to
the base email specifications, and will publish new versions of these
documents at Internet Standard status, per RFC 6410. The limited review
is restricted to corrections and clarifications only. In addition to
processing existing, verified errata and errata marked as "held for
document update", the WG may address newly-offered errata. However, no
new protocol extensions or amendments will be considered for inclusion
into 5321bis and 5322bis documents, unless they are already published as
RFCs.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp