Re: Getting mild normative changes in before 2.2 is finalised

On 04/08/2022 11:09, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:

> I'll just mention that the idea of having corrections in a separate 
> errata (while leaving the original text as is) is supremely antiquated 
> and not very useful for a standard - expecting developers to look not 
> just at the word of the standard, but then having to jump to the errata 
> to check that what they just read is actually correct?

To be clear, I understand it for a standard that has been published and 
is supposed to be stable. But as we're now talking about a new edition, 
it makes more sense to me to actually correct things where needed (but 
yes, list the change in a "differences from 2.1" section).

Patrick H. Lauke | |
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Thursday, 4 August 2022 10:16:38 UTC