I also am having problems elevating a suggestion to slightly modify explanatory wording to make something that is clear already even more clear to an erratum, particularly when there is a precise formal definition available in the same document. peter On 07/29/2017 12:24 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > >> On Jul 29, 2017, at 12:29 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: >> >> Pat, Antoine, >> >> should I interpret this by saying that the original report should be added to the official errata[1], to be considered by a future Working Group or any other type of refresh of the Recommendations? > > Hmm. It hardly amounts to an erratum, more like an editorial suggestion. But if that is the only way to record it, then so be it. > > Pat >Received on Saturday, 29 July 2017 22:34:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:52 UTC