Hi -
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey(_at_)jefsey(_dot_)com>
To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn(_at_)mindspring(_dot_)com>;
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: <icar(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: Seeking reviewers for language tag registry docs in WG last call
I am glad Randy Preshun now joins my call for additional expertise. This
Draft is particular: due to its political, cultural and commercial
implications, and their possible impact on the IETF, what is to be
considered is probably more what is not in the Draft than the technical
constraints introduced by the Draft, where I consider that we should simplify.
A first list of questions is under http://rfc3066.org/review.htm. Readers
should also address these questions. They are important enough to be
considered carefully, with an open mind. IMHO they call for a dedicated
document providing a clear, stable, politically protected IETF framework.
jfc
...
Please do not be misled by the domain name of http://rfc3066.org/review.htm
That site is not affiliated with the ltru WG or the
ietf-languages(_at_)iana(_dot_)org
mailing list that performs the language tag review function described in RFC
3066.
I think prospective reviewers' time would be much better spent looking at
the actual documents under WG last call, rather than trying to make sense of
the stuff at http://rfc3066.org/review.htm
The documents under WG last call are
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-09.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-initial-02.txt
We'd prefer to have your comments on the documents themselves,
rather than reactions to Jefsey's sometimes over-heated polemic.
Randy, ltru co-chair
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf