Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
<SNIP previous posters text>
It might seem odd to people whose names do fit in ASCII but there are a
lot of people who care about this type of issue.
You can of course publish drafts and RFC's as XML which supports any
character set you want.
The IETF has had the attitude 'this is
the way we do things here, nobody asked you to like it'.
It would be better to state: "if you don't like it, participate".
Because if you didn't participate, then don't complain that it isn't
like you wanted it to be. Yes that requires significant effort, time and
thus cash, but that is mostly unavoidable.
So far 700 translations of W3C specifications have been made by
One can always start translating RFC's: 4267 RFC's and a long list of
drafts to go, though there is a lot of material already translated by
book authors. Note that many languages don't have translations for many
English words. German is one of the good examples where they have a lot
of German versions of English words, but they don't have one for 'Hyper
Text Transfer Protocol' unless you babelfish it to "Hyper
Text-Übergangsprotokoll"*, which is far from a useful translation. There
is also the thing that sentence construction might cause
misinterpretation from what the original working group meant. SHOULD and
MUST both translate to Muß in German, which is thus not correct either.
This can cause many issues.
And German is somewhat in the same line as English, I am not even
thinking in the area of Asian languages, which I unfortunately am far
from familiar with except that they resemble small pictures of what they
I don't think it is a task for the IETF itself to translate documents.
But it would indeed be nice to have a place for them, with a big note
that they have not been verified and may include odd translations. Maybe
there could be a separate 'translated documents' section?
* contains a U-umlaut (Ü) and Ringel-S (ß)
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ietf mailing list