[rssac-caucus] On versioning our documents

[William Sotomayor]

+1

Agree to something standard that can be used across all RSSAC documents as 
well for versioning.

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> Greetings. This might sound really weenie, but it turns out to be
> important in the long run. I propose that from now on, we alway publish
> our documents as "RSSAC 0xx version 1". It is impossible to predict when
> will or will not need a version 2 (and beyond). If someone says "see RSSAC
> 0xx", that should always mean "the highest version number of 0xx", not
> "exactly the one numbered 0xx".
>
> The issues in 002 version 2 are not that big but NIST (the US government
> standards department that creates cryptographic standards) has had *huge*
> headaches when they have published revisions because Google still refers
> to the base version, not the most recent one.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
>