[cabfpub] [Ext] Ballot XXX: Update Discussion Period
paul.hoffman at icann.org
Fri Dec 8 17:44:28 UTC 2017
On Dec 8, 2017, at 7:38 AM, Kirk Hall via Public <public at cabforum.org> wrote:
> In the past, we have let ballot authors correct typos - such as "certificaet" to "certificate". Would that no longer be allowed (meaning, would that type of editing to a ballot require the restart of a new seven day discussion period)?
In the IETF, when similar situations happen, there is often disagreement about whether this one little change is editorial or has technical effects. However, that disagreement often comes up a few days after the change was made, making reverting difficult if other changes have been made subsequently. The draft numbering scheme in the IETF looks arcane and nerdy, but it has made it easier to see when an editorial change is actually a technical change and cleanly revert it. I don't know if that would work in the CABForum.
More information about the Public