Re: [Rfced-future] AUTH48 and editing before approval (was: Re: Welcome to the RFC Editor Future Development Program)

[John Levine <[e-mail]>]

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>Can we distill the high level point that needs addressing in this process?
>
>Are the touch points and flow the responsibility of the RFC Editor to define, or should that be this group?

It is a fact of life that errors will always turn up at inconvenient
points in the process.  One time I found a mistake in one of my books
while doing the equivalent of AUTH48.  I found that the same error was
in two previous editions, and none of my coauthor, our quite competent
editors, or me had noticed it before.

We need to consider the tradeoffs between fixing them and living with
them, with the costs of fixing them being delay and perhaps rework,
and the possibility that the fix will be wrong, too.

R's,
John