Re: Updated IESG Statement "IESG Processing of RFC Errata for the IETF Stream"

[Carsten Bormann <cabo@xxxxxxx>]

On 11. May 2021, at 09:21, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm most familiar with WHATWG, and their "living standards", but I think that's reasonably close to what you're describing.

https://whatwg.org/

So I wouldn't dare argue that what you sketched out is unlikely. ISTM we're just trying to figure out how close, or how far away, that's going to be to what the IETF is doing in ten years. 

(1) This is completely unrelated to the subject of errata reports and their processing.

(2) The WHATWG process works great if you have a couple of people sitting around a table and deciding what will be implemented in their products next.

Many IETF standards have more complex audiences and more complex interoperability requirements.

I don’t think the WHATWG style will replace the style with defined milestones (“versions”) completely for the IETF, probably not even for a large subset.

We could get more agile churning out those milestones, which is where the focus should be.

Grüße, Carsten