[I18ndir] Review volunteer needed (Fwd: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07)

Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> Tue, 28 April 2020 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE3F3A0A9F for <i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:30:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZFXJZad6g7n0 for <i18ndir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:30:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBDEC3A0A9C for <i18ndir@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:30:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268B4AAB0E70 for <i18ndir@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:30:03 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from episteme.net ([]) by localhost (episteme.net []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L_w0qZa3Duey for <i18ndir@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:30:01 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [] (episteme.net []) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 51965AAB0E60 for <i18ndir@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:30:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Pete Resnick" <resnick@episteme.net>
To: "Internationalization Directorate" <i18ndir@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:14:35 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5683)
Message-ID: <A93B38FC-7D55-4D06-80AE-F165F242F259@episteme.net>
References: <E552C138-7938-42BD-B2B2-26AD8AA43516@nostrum.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18ndir/Qv7hf7sCku1fii1ewd1rGHxAcIQ>
Subject: [I18ndir] Review volunteer needed (Fwd: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07)
X-BeenThere: i18ndir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Directorate <i18ndir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i18ndir>, <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i18ndir/>
List-Post: <mailto:i18ndir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18ndir>, <mailto:i18ndir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 19:30:06 -0000


DISPATCH has made a working group last call on 
draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs. Given how much i18n content there 
is, the ADs and chairs agreed that an early review wouldn't hurt. There 
is a bunch of text about formal programming languages in this draft, so 
I didn't want to just stick somebody with it. Anyone feel comfortable 
enough to take on a review?

Note that the review itself is much less horrible than it seems. This is 
really a -bis draft of RFC 4329, and most of the i18n language in here 
is unchanged from 4329. See:


So it's really just reviewing any changes, and making sure that nothing 
absolutely egregious was in 4329 itself.



Forwarded message:

> From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
> To: DISPATCH WG <dispatch@ietf.org>
> Cc: dispatch chairs <dispatch-chairs@ietf.org>rg>, ART ADs 
> <art-ads@ietf.org>rg>, draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org
> Subject: [dispatch] WGLC of draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07
> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:24:47 -0500
> Hi,
> This is a repeat working group last call of 
> draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-07.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs/
> The new version has changed quite a bit due to feedback from the first 
> WGLC, shepherd feedback, and feedback from others. In particular, this 
> version obsoletes RFC 4329, rather than updating as did the version 
> from the first WGLC.
> This WGLC will end on 8 May 20202. Please send feedback to the 
> DISPATCH list and the authors. And if you review the document and 
> think it’s ready to go, please say so.
> Thanks!
> Ben