Errata for hyperspec?

[Chaitanya Gupta]

On 14 December 2017 at 14:59, Steve Haflich <shaflich at gmail.com> wrote:
> The Hyperspec is a copyrighted document owned by Lispworks.  They can change
> it, and perhaps others could create a revised version under the generous
> terms of use.
>
> But the Hyperspec is mostly a version of the official ANSI specification for
> CL, and revising that is something much more difficult.  (I won't here go
> into the story how X3J13 manipulated the final draft of the ANS into a
> freely-available document prior to ANSI slapping their restrictive copyright
> on it, but that's what the Hyperspec and other similar freely-available
> versions of the CL specification are derived from.)

You are right, which is why I was wondering if there's one place one
could definitively consult for errata in the standard or examples.

The cliki list, even though it didn't have this issue, seems
exhaustive though the page is poorly maintained.

Is there any other place where someone is maintaining the errata?

>
> The erroneous example you found is real and it would certainly be nice to
> fix it, but note 1.4.3 Sections Not Formally Part Of This Standard.
> Sections labeled Examples or Notes are not normative -- i.e., they are
> illustrative only and not a binding part of the language definition.

I didn't know that. Thanks!

Chaitanya