On Aug 6, 2019, at 14:48, Fernando Gont <fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Skimming through some of the errata, some areas seem to have technical > errata in their "Reported" Queue for over 5 years. Here is one more data point I forgot to mention: There is at least one standard by another SDO that references an RFC **together with some unhandled errata report** to describe how they are using and interpreting the RFC. I can’t remember where I saw this (sorry for not reporting it then), but I remember sitting there with an open mouth for a while. In particular since the errata report seemed wrong at the time to me. But I also thought we can’t blame the SDO; errata reports are presented in a quasi-official way by the RFC editor even before they are verified. TL;DR: Unhandled errata reports do hurt. Grüße, Carsten
