Re: [Json] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7159 (3922)

Pete,

It's been removed.

To answer Barry's question, we're in favor of removing it.

Thank you.
RFC Editor/ar

On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:50 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:

> And if one does, we will similarly remove it.
> 
> RFC Editor: Please remove erratum 3922.
> 
> pr
> 
> On 3/19/14 8:29 PM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
>> I think it's better as rejected, otherwise, there's a higher chance of a similar one popping up in the future.
>> 
>> Regards,    Martin.
>> 
>> On 2014/03/20 05:23, Barry Leiba wrote:
>>> I'd sat this shouldn't be marked "Rejected", but should instead be removed
>>> from the errata system.  What does the RFC Editor think?
>>> 
>>> Barry
>>> 
>>> On Wednesday, March 19, 2014, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Please reject this errata report. There was a conscious decision made by
>>>> the RFC Editor to issue the new RFC; the fact that the reporter doesn't
>>>> like that decision does not warrant an errata.
>>>> 
>>>> --Paul Hoffman, JSON WG co-chair
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> json mailing list
>>> json@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
> 