Dear all
I'd like to repeat my earlier points that
* We should make use of the existing list, namely the conformance document,
for the purposes being discussed here - I don't think we need a new list.
* We don't have to distinguish positive and negative categories, because they
are
I agree with what @ethanrd and @erget said, namely that we have errata and what
I would call deprecations.
I think it is quite important to actually remove deprecations at some point,
preferably under a predictable policy, e.g. two versions after the initial
deprecation. The reason is that
TLDR: My opinion is that the rules are sound for correcting errata, but we do
not describe what to do in the case of deprecation. **This may not be necessary
because we could consider deprecation normal care and feeding for the
standard.** I do agree that we should have a list of deprecations
