On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 11:14 AM John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> wrote:
 
Now the question of what to do, and the reason I'm bringing this up here, depends on the status of the section in question.  Are the claims normative or merely factual?  If they are normative, then the only path to fixing them is to issue a new SRFI with the new definitions and deprecate SRFI 14 in favor of it.  But if they are factual, they can be fixed by erratum, though admittedly it would be an enormous erratum, covering a little more than 7 printed pages out of 20.  A third alternative is of course to do nothing. 

As far as I can tell, they are normative, but they were written without considering the possibility that they might become wrong.  Given that and given that you estimate that an erratum would require so many pages, it would be much better to publish a new SRFI.  That would hardly be more work than publishing an erratum, anyway.