Jeff Williams wrote (though I get the impression he's summarizing other
people's objections, not raising them himself, as he then answers
them):
1.) If the UN can handle it, who cannot the IETF, Ripe or ICANN now
be able to do so.
The primary answer is almost certainly two factors:
1) The people at the UN are, generally speaking, career diplomats.
Knowing foreign languages and cultures is part of their way of life.
Even if they do not know the particular language someone else is
speaking in, they should at least be basically familiar with the most
popular languages of the world. I would bet that over 90% of the
diplomats at the UN could present a speech in ungrammatical and heavily
accented but still passable English -- and that over 80% of them would
understand the major points of it, with no translators.
2) Much more importantly: money. If someone wishes to donate enough
money to construct an IETF Assembly Building, with infrastructure to
support translator booths and headphones at all desks, plus hire all
the appropriate translators, not to mention find a friendly place that
will waive all the property tax on it, go right ahead. I'm not holding
my breath.
2.) As English is the international language of choice,
To coin a Yogi-Berra-ism, English is the lingua franca of the modern
world. B-)
--
Dave Aronson, Senior Software Engineer, Secure Software Inc.
Email me at: work (D0T) 2004 (@T) dja (D0T) mailme (D0T) org
(Opinions above NOT those of securesw.com unless so stated!)
WE'RE HIRING developers, auditors, and VP of Prof. Services.