----- Original Message -----
From: "John Levine" <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 6:31 PM
I'm more concerned with reading and writing.
I still don't understand what this is supposed to mean in practice.
There have been I-D's that desperately needed the help of a competent
English speaker to rewrite parts where the language was so fractured
that I couldn't figure it out. In my experience, people with poor
English skills who come to the IETF are doing the best they can, so
this suggests that if you (the general you) see a draft of interest
with language problems, it would be a good idea to offer to edit or
coauthor it.
How? (seriously)
I have tried editing the xml and get a sense of why it can be so hard to
write coherent English in that markup language. I have tried editing
the text in the direction I think that it should go but then it is
unclear what changes I am suggesting. I have tried my own markup
/*rgurnggkjik/regurgitate?/ which I understand but others do not:-(
I want the sort of tool that was a commonplace when programming decades
ago, so that the changes are apparent, are temporary but can be
selectively made permanent by the editor - or not as the case may be -
and are faultlessly incorporated into the xml when made permanent.
Any ideas?
Tom Petch
p.s. oh yes, it must run on Windows.
I don't really any WG sessions being badly impaired by poor speakers
although there have certainly been presentations I wouldn't have been
able to follow if the speaker didn't have slides, and there are plenty
of WGs whose meetings I've never attended. Is there a concrete
suggestion here?
R's,
John