On Jul 29, 2013, at 3:59 PM, t.p. wrote:
I think the points you make below are good, once the newcomer to the
IETF has found their working group. This is not always easy. Fine if
your interest is in OSPF, ISIS, TLS, TCPMaintenance but in other
spheres, the IETF approach of choosing a 'witty' name seems to me less
than welcoming. Think about it as a stranger to these parts. What
comes to mind when you encounter; salud, straw drinks insipid lemonade -
behave, kitten vipr, cuss!
I was thinking this morning that clever short WG names are fine, but we
shouldn't try too hard to make them acronyms - or at least, we shouldn't
pretend that the acronyms suffice as descriptions for the WGs. In lists of
WGs, we should include brief descriptions of the WGs, not the acronym
expansions.
Keith