Bonjour Russ,
I am sorry, and I did not mean any insult, most of IETF meeting are not in
Europe but most IETF meetings are in America. Therefore, my reason was that
the decisions and dimensions discussed are mostly American dimensions. I
may be wrong, and I never say I am right. However, when I ask why IETF most
meetings are in America, the reply is always : because the majority
participants are from America (that means the majority participants are
English language speakers and readers).
To encourage the demography change and developing diversity of the IETF it
is important to reduce meetings in America to balance in all the world
regions and then hope to open the subject of two languages again to see the
results.
AB
On Sunday, March 9, 2014, Russ Housley wrote:
AB:
Harald Alvestrand, a Norwegian, was IETF Chair when this discussion took
place. He made the consensus call.
I find you assertion that the discussion only considered American
dimensions quite an insult to all that participated in the IETF at the time.
Russ
On Mar 9, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
Bonjour Russ
If there is no pointer to such discussion then I believe there were no
discussion at all. However, I will raise this issue very seriously again.
Please provide me with information so I can comment on it, because you
mentioned that it was discussed in every dimension and I think it is only
the American dimensions.
AB
On Sunday, March 9, 2014, Russ Housley wrote:
The IETF had a discussion about languages while Harald was chair. In my
opinion, every dimension of the issues was discussed at that time. I do
not think that anything new has been raised for use to reopen the
discussion.
Russ
On Mar 9, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
Bonjour,
I agree with Mohammed totally. I recommend allowing another second
official language will solve a lot of native English speakers problems.
Comments below
AB
On Sunday, March 9, 2014, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Mar 8, 2014, at 8:02 PM, mohammed serrhini <serrhini(_at_)mail(_dot_)ru>
wrote:
I think their exclusion is not fair
the effort must be made by the latter because he has put himself in the
skin of the other
and must to ask him self , what happen in the case if native language is
the official language IETF is not English
One of the frustrations of life is that even if we recognize that
something is unfair, there may be limited possibilities for addressing the
unfairness. It was once the case that French was the language of
diplomacy, and an attempt was made to formulate an artificial language,
Esperanto, for use by diplomats as a new "lingua franca."
Not only diplomats but the French language is more sensitive and polite
language which has nice feelings.
For better or for worse, the Internet broke that process (I don't think
there was much hope for Esperanto anyway). So what do we do now?
The answer to your Qs is let us Speak French, and write and read in
French. Programming in one language is poor programming, IETF SHOULD become
smarter and it SHOULD be able to write and read in French.
Try to revive Esperanto as a language for expressing standards? Choose
a different language, so as to change the lucky recipient of privilege?
Thanks
I can't speak for other IETFers, but I am keenly aware of the unfairness
of the current situation. But the only thing I know how to do to fix it
is to help people for whom english is not their first language to
participate in english anyway.
That is one side solving, so you help non native speakers what about
helping native English speakers that complaint a lot about English grammar
and non sense of IETF participants that speak IETF language.
IETF language is using English right but it is not the same way Americans
use it but it is the worlds use of English.
There is a lot of interest within the IETF in doing this--it's not just me.
I add to your interest. There were a great person I meat in IETF that is
volunteering translation to French language.
If you have ideas for how to change this, please share them with us.
I always do share my ideas but some native English readers use their
receiving problem to put down ideas just because of few grammar mistakes.
But the mere fact that I as a native english speaker happen to be
privileged at the moment is a fact with which I am already painfully
familiar (although no doubt much less painfully than the non-native english
speakers).
If