re: RFC 3253, "Extensions to WEBDAV"

[Joyce Reynolds <jkrey@ISI.EDU>]

IESG:

The RFC Editor notes with dismay that RFC 3253, "Extensions to WEBDAV",
has 16 purely typographical errors in its 118 pages.  See:
http://www.webdav.org/deltav/protocol/rfc3253-issues-list.htm.

We wonder, at what point is it desirable to ask the authors to
republish an RFC with many editorial fixes?  That should not be a major
effort, as it should not require more than pro forma approval.

If this happens very often, we are doing something very wrong.  There
were 5 authors on this document.  We ought to expect better.

Joyce
(on behalf of RFC Editor)