Closed baskaufs closed 4 years ago
The following proposed changes probably fall into this category and are numbered in a Google doc (with commenting enabled).
2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 31, 33, 34, 36, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, and 53
Completed with https://github.com/tdwg/ac/pull/155
Section 3.2 of the TDWG Vocabulary Maintenance Specification indicates that clerical mistakes can be corrected without a public comment period or Executive Decision (Section 3.2.1).
The key criterion here is that these errors are not substantive since they do not compromise the usefulness or accuracy of systems based on the vocabulary.
I would construe this category to include changes to non-normitive parts of documents and term metadata fields that are non-normitive (labels, notes). I'm also construing it to include misplaced text that needs to be moved from one normative field to another (definitions to usage and vice versa), and situations where clearly non-normative material (like examples) is misplaced in normative fields. Correcting these text placement errors should have no effect on implementations.
This issue is a placeholder for tracking proposed term changes that fall into this category.