Re: [Gendispatch] revised (was: Re: draft charter text: terminology-related WG)

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

LGTM. Ship it.

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 7:59 AM Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Here is some revised draft charter text.  There are some edits in the
> penultimate paragraph to address comments on list and the last paragraph is
> new. There were also three suggestions I did not address:
>
> (3) comments about whether to leave in the "master/slave" and
> "blacklist/whitelist" examples. Opinions, to me, seemed mixed on this
> suggestion and the charter text is otherwise very abstract so, I thought,
> leaving them in gives context for external readers.
>
> (2) recommendation for a second deliverable -- I didn't really see much
> support and it is not consistent with the gendispatch outcome.
>
> (3) recommendation to replace “Effective” with “Inclusive" in the WG name.
> I didn't see much support and some people want to spend time defining
> inclusive first.
>
> Cheers,
> spt
>
> --------
>
> Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (TERM)
> ----
>
> The mission of the IETF as specified in BCP 95 is to produce high quality,
> relevant technical documents that influence the way people design, use, and
> manage the Internet. As RFC 7322 explains, "The ultimate goal of the RFC
> publication process is to produce documents that are readable, clear,
> consistent, and reasonably uniform." RFCs and Internet-drafts are most
> effective when they use terminology that is clear, precise, and widely
> accessible to readers from varying backgrounds and cultures.
>
> In the years leading up to the chartering of this working group, there has
> been discussion in the IETF, in other standards organizations, and in the
> technology industry about the use of certain terms (such as “master/slave”
> and “blacklist/whitelist”) in technical documentation and whether those and
> other terms have effects on inclusivity. While opinions vary among IETF
> participants about this topic, there is general agreement that the IETF
> community would benefit from informational recommendations about using
> effective and inclusive terminology in IETF documents.
>
> The TERM working group is therefore chartered to produce an Informational
> RFC containing recommendations on terminology to use in technical work
> produced by the IETF. The RFC will express general principles for judging
> when language is inclusive or exclusive. It will also point out potentially
> problematic terms and potential alternatives, or link to an updateable
> resource containing such information.
>
> The TERM working group is a focused group aiming to produce a single
> deliverable. It is designed to complement other efforts at fostering
> inclusivity in the IETF.
>
> Milestones:
>
> July 2021: Adopt draft providing informational terminology recommendations
>
> > On Feb 11, 2021, at 15:39, Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!,
> >
> > Here is some proposed charter text to address the terminology-related WG.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > spt
> >
> > ----------
> >
> > Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (TERM)
> > ----
> >
> > The mission of the IETF as specified in BCP 95 is to produce high
> quality, relevant technical documents that influence the way people design,
> use, and manage the Internet. As RFC 7322 explains, "The ultimate goal of
> the RFC publication process is to produce documents that are readable,
> clear, consistent, and reasonably uniform." RFCs and Internet-drafts are
> most effective when they use terminology that is clear, precise, and widely
> accessible to readers from varying backgrounds and cultures.
> >
> > In the years leading up to the chartering of this working group, there
> has been discussion in the IETF, in other standards organizations, and in
> the technology industry about the use of certain terms (such as
> “master/slave” and “blacklist/whitelist”) in technical documentation and
> whether those and other terms have effects on inclusivity. While opinions
> vary among IETF participants about this topic, there is general agreement
> that the IETF community would benefit from informational recommendations
> about using effective and inclusive terminology in IETF documents.
> >
> > The TERM working group is therefore chartered to produce an
> Informational RFC containing recommendations on terminology to use in
> technical work produced by the IETF.
> >
> > Milestones:
> >
> > July 2021: Adopt draft providing informational terminology
> recommendations
>
> --
> Gendispatch mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
>