This could be bad.
Seriously, the current Rule 2125 is more trouble than it's worth.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
I just noticed something about rule 2201, "Self-Ratification":
[snip]
2. A claim of error, appropriate for matters of fact. The
publisher of the original document SHALL (if e was required to
publish that document) or SHOULD (otherwise) do one of the
following in a timely fashion:
1. Deny the claim (causing it to cease to be a doubt).
2. Publish a revision.
3. Initiate an inquiry case regarding the truth of the claim
(if the subject is actually a matter of law), or cite a
relevant existing inquiry case.
Nowhere does it say that the published CAN do any of the things in the list.
