> On 10 May 2021, at 20:22, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On May 8, 2021 at 6:53:46 PM, Bob Hinden wrote: > > > Bob: > > Hi! > > ... >> I think something is needed where the reported problem can be accepted, but >> the fix can be rejected. Perhaps some new states, or a change to how the >> Errata system works. > > You're right, *without proper explanation*, there is no explicit state > that indicates a valid problem and an invalid solution. Hold for > Document Update is the closest as further discussion is obviously > needed. > > However, even with a proper explanation, it may still be confusing > whether the proposed solution is valid or not. One of the issues is > that there is a single notes field that is used by both the submitter > and the verifier. Also, these notes appear *after* the > problem/solution have been described, making it harder to find > relevant comments. > > Changing how the errata system works requires a wider discussion of > course -- beyond what the current statement is intended for. > > Thanks! > > Alvaro. > The AD can edit the text and provide a solution that works. If there is a problem but no solution that would be quite worrying. - Stewart
