Previously (draft -00) we said that each instruction would have a status of

Permanent, Provisional, or Historical in the IANA registry.

However, we now have conformance groups about to be merged into the ISA doc,

and at IETF 118 we discussed having each conformance group have a status of

Permanent, Provisional, or Historical.  That is, it makes sense for the status to
be at the granularity of conformance group since one should implement all

instructions in a conformance group together.

As a result I now believe that each individual instruction no longer needs its own

status since it can be derived from the status of the conformance group(s) it

belongs to.  So in the IANA Considerations section, I plan to remove “status”

from the list of fields in the instruction sub-registry and ONLY have “status”

in the list of fields for the conformance group sub-registry).

Let me know if anyone has a good reason to keep it per-instruction.

Dave