Re: RFC Errata: when to file, and when not to

[Yoav Nir <[e-mail]>]

On Aug 7, 2012, at 11:29 AM, t.p. wrote:
> When I Google RFCnnnn, I am sometimes directed to www.ietf.org, which is
> not much help here. Other times, I am directed to tools.ietf.org, whose
> format I find less friendly but which does have 'errata exist' in the
> top right hand corner.  However, I cannot click on that,

No, but two lines above it, there's an "Errata" link, which you can click.

> unlike the
> Obsoletes and Updates fields; but, more importantly, would your average
> not-involved-in-standards audience know what errata are?  For me, the
> word comes from a classical education, before ever I got involved with
> standards, and so is a commonplace, but is it used in the world at
> large?  I suspect not.

Probably not, and neither is "bis". But what can you do about this?  It's either allow updating of RFCs after publication, or have a list or corrections. Would it make it easier to find if they were called "notes" or "corrections" instead of "errata"?

Yoav