ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-barnes-healthy-food-06.txt

2013-02-25 22:02:34
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM, SM <sm(_at_)resistor(_dot_)net> wrote:
Hi Mary,

At 10:36 25-02-2013, Mary Barnes wrote:

have Ice Cream Thursdays unless someone sponsors it.  Since I was
highly disappointed at the Atlanta meeting, I was able to get Polycom
to sponsor the event at IETF-86 ;)


This is ample motivation for me to support the draft. :-)


At this stage, the feedback I would like related to this document is
with regards it's readiness for publication as an RFC.  One of the


It better to decide whether to publish now (Last Call) then to wait another
five years.

In Section 4:

 "A wide range of research has shown that about 10% of the population
  prefer to eat a healthy diet."

Can I have some references for that?
[MB]  You can find quite a few articles that discuss how many people
follow a healthy lifestyle - exercise, eat their veggies, don't smoke,
etc. and that's about 10% if the population (there are US and European
studies).   In is extremely common for those who do one to do the
other.  The  highest number I have found for the recommended amount of
veggies is about 12%, for example.  If you want I can add some of
these references:
- http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/publications/hei/HEi89-90report.pdf (12%
scored in the range classified as a healthy diet)
- http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/8/213 (Study of Basque women)
- 
http://www.ehfg.org/fileadmin/ehfg/Website/Archiv/2011/Presentations/W3/w3_1_chestnov_2.pdf
(a Russian study)
Or, I can change the "about" to "roughly".  I think the number is
likely a tad higher.  My point was that it's not just too or three
people but a fair percentage of the participants.
[/MB]

 "Thus, it is estimated that at least 10 percent of the IETF
  participants would take advantage of healthy food offerings."

Based on the previous sentence, the above could be read as at least 10
percent of IETF participants are educated. :-)
[MB]  I was giving everyone the benefit of the doubt ;) [/MB]

  "There are laws in many countries and jurisdictions (e.g.,U.S., E.U.)
   that make it illegal to mislabel foods that are Halal or Kosher.  At
   this time, food manufacturers in many jusisdictions (e.g.,U.S., U.K,
   E.U.) must include all ingredients on the labels of any packaged food
   product."

The "must" was violated (
http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/press_office/news_of_the_day/horse-meat-food-labelling-plan_en.htm
).

In Section 5:

  "For cases of first time attendees for a specific location, relevant
   information can be gathered from attendees that have previously
   visited the city."

There are recurrent discussions as nobody volunteered to gather that
information in one place.

In Section 8:

  "One can never assume that everything has been taken care of by
   someone else."

I suggest moving that to the security considerations section.
[MB] Ok. [/MB]

I suggest having the draft make recommendations instead of setting
requirements.
[MB] I don't know that the distinction particularly matters in this
type of document.  These are
requirements to ensure that some of us have food that we can eat.  If
the some of requirements aren't
satisfied, some of us do not have readily accessible food to eat. [/MB]
Some of the items in Section 7 "might" be things the IETF can
do; some of the items are for other parties.
[MB] My opinion is that the folks that sign contracts and work with
the venue staff are responsible for
communicating those requirements and ensuring the venue can meet those
requirements. [/MB]
 It would be easier if the two
sets are kept separate.  I suggest moving the History stuff to an appendix
(e.g. "The Cornucopia restaurant in Dublin [cornucopia] is a perfect example
of how this can be done in an extremely cost-effective efficient and
gastronomically appealing manner".
[MB] I personally think it's really helpful to have a very specific,
real-life example. But,  I could
change it to be more general and not reference the specific restaurant
since we also had a
great place like that in Quebec City.  [/MB]

I suggest avoiding stuff like "American
Disabilities Act".  It would be better to formulate the draft in terms of an
international audience.
[MB] It is an example and it's the only one I'm familiar with although
I assume other countries have similar laws.  The last sentence
referencing the ADA is a very important distinction in terms of who is
required to obey the law, but perhaps it's not particular useful or
relevant to this document, so I can remove that sentence. [/MB]

Regards,
-sm