[Errata-design] An example of an erratum that takes time for little value

"Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 13 January 2015 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <rse@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: errata-design@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: errata-design@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42EEC181C67 for <errata-design@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:23:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U_3OFiIfD0cj for <errata-design@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:23:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (mail.amsl.com [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::28]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D158181C64 for <errata-design@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:23:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AFD61E5A0D for <errata-design@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:23:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WCE18vGJDpVd for <errata-design@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:23:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (unknown [98.125.220.142]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 677281E5A02 for <errata-design@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:23:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54B59B0A.6040809@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:24:10 -0800
From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: errata-design@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Errata-design] An example of an erratum that takes time for little value
X-BeenThere: errata-design@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <errata-design.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/errata-design>, <mailto:errata-design-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/errata-design/>
List-Post: <mailto:errata-design@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:errata-design-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/errata-design>, <mailto:errata-design-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 22:23:27 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello all,

While we're waiting for everyone to respond to the Doodle poll (*hint*
https://doodle.com/925i53egnm5957i2 *hint*), an example recently came up
for discussion of an errata that is not helping the world be a better place.

http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=4230

I suggest that a measure of a successful errata system will be one
visually and through metadata differentiate between levels of usefulness
for an implementer/reader.   The vote system could be of use here
(though the irony of even thinking "vote" and "IETF" in the same context
tweaks my brain).

Any alternative opinions to whether that measure is reasonable?

- -Heather

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUtZsKAAoJEER/xjINbZoGCqkH/j768D+34rG5qV6XTvvDfdaM
rJzif1MPaHO5a6qpds3Yt4z/uOdQLdK66OgVTG8icMjB8iLNZgcQVXTN0sWLYSY/
HPtzLPz1eo8fLdb+qbQ7AyAq+w2PCT6ZaGicVmVvc3s4Eh4PsZxCArG3TcnLVrv2
ySv4D3JljnQFnzq8QLUKY+iEqTdIBQGJxNTkojphq2RLcnY/jTQYaXg0alXCNOYX
DiixVHco9rGQsBqgCye+t6fUIUrov6g9Ccp2Tg5vuuU6OR0G+TKpJ7VIWwR3LOP8
fR5eU26l1gkvAcD8JdzYnoGpTROlWKkX6IXHqlJETXOZSLkJdR/z1ylC6Zn8CUM=
=GoLq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----