Joel Jaeggli, Stephen Farrell, Barry Leiba, Pete Resnick, Ted Lemon, Mark Nottingham, Nevil Brownlee, Robert Sparks, Sandy Ginoza, Heather Flanagan
The RFC Series began posting errata in 2000; the current system kicked off in towards the end of 2007. The purpose of the system is to keep a record of errors in the document series; a particularly important action when it comes to errors that impact implementation of a standard. Individuals interact with the errata system as submitters, reviewers, approvers, and consumers, and may cross over roles depending on the actions they are performing (e.g., reporting an error, looking for errors as they implement or create a -bis doc, etc.)
Over the last several years, there have been a variety of requests with regards to the errata system, including requests to do away with the errata system, requests to expand the errata system to include more than just errors, and requests to try and streamline the process for submission and approval. In addition, a need to consider how the errata system will handle the new format era, when RFCs are represented in more than one format with slightly different content (i.e., artwork) has been thrown into the mix.
The purpose of the design team is to review the existing errata process, discuss the various requests for change and enhancement, and recommend a model going forward that could in turn be used as requirements for any programming effort. Ideally, we won't be looking to describe a full rewrite of the whole system with custom code. The work, including the time needed to implement at least the format-related changes in the system, will ideally be done before the format changes are in production (est Q4 2015/Q1 2016).