Hi Paul, > It depends on whether or not you want the publisher to do > technical evaluation work, or whether they really are a > publisher. If we follow Brian's suggestion for a independent > review board (IRB) and take the independent submission > vetting out of the hands of the publisher, then the IRB could > also vet any non-editorial errata as well. That seems like a > clear separation of duties that would make it clearer what > the published does and does not do. In the past few years, > the number of non-editorial errata is quite small, so this > should not add much work to the ERB.
Actually, I think it would make more sense for the IRB to vet errata for independently published documents (ones they approved in the first place) and for the IETF (either the pertinent WG if it still exists, or the area directors?) to vet technical errata to IETF publications. Margaret _______________________________________________ Techspec mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec
