IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [I18nrp] FWD: Re: [Idna-update] [I18n-discuss] draft-faltstrom-unicode11, i18n "directorate", and related issues

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 05 December 2018 21:54 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F2D130E95 for <i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:54:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=pGaCPCFv; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=TtAQ0Gw0
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MVMLPVvfxPCj for <i18nrp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:54:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4601294D0 for <i18nrp@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:54:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([197.224.108.107]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id wB5LsSSX028334 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Dec 2018 13:54:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1544046879; x=1544133279; bh=7zjWdeNQ7zFhM+RX6CJho3G8rwSU3C00a9lvQzBBg9I=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=pGaCPCFvkW9Nj7AEMrOAIzRhB5ACvObs8O3xu8eVPiWT+m/mK3dQ5/VNBxMvGdC5Q ZZbU6Rotu0hlNMJ+zRncM4MfsOQ/c15sGeQXcJOzj2+UZgakxWCErSE9lXJ8+HvjcR 1NVRnGSc7pFjwhTFCdfwIAWRVj13aD8tf0krreB4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1544046879; x=1544133279; i=@elandsys.com; bh=7zjWdeNQ7zFhM+RX6CJho3G8rwSU3C00a9lvQzBBg9I=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=TtAQ0Gw03Xd3wABzcekxR3c1brjLJh5ccKJMXos9FoS8bS2kjeW7pL1fEvabuRiXS aV7zkOOy4PJOZvzSCf0Wf2cNhzfxnDr+hcOkNgx3/ST2LHUw33B9Xae+ZtoLG+atEO u9aoxdtbPO9M1psNOAj1PxI5TygIn5UzBSk7MYq8=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20181205133212.1240a520@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 13:52:47 -0800
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, i18nrp@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181205155025.35bpnwne3tqw6i7h@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <FF58A82A9FC582B643CD76B4@PSB> <6.2.5.6.2.20181204185928.1085a3d0@elandnews.com> <20181205155025.35bpnwne3tqw6i7h@mx4.yitter.info>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18nrp/-hUQccv2l6YhV71U69xcxv3h0FI>
Subject: Re: [I18nrp] FWD: Re: [Idna-update] [I18n-discuss] draft-faltstrom-unicode11, i18n "directorate", and related issues
X-BeenThere: i18nrp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Review Procedures <i18nrp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i18nrp>, <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i18nrp/>
List-Post: <mailto:i18nrp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i18nrp>, <mailto:i18nrp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 21:54:51 -0000

Hi Andrew,
At 07:50 AM 05-12-2018, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>But of course, an AD could block a draft on the grounds that s/he
>doesn't have enough information yet because s/he didn't have a
>directorate yet that was sufficient to provide needed advice on
>whether a document can proceed.  I don't see any reason why that would
>be problematic, and I see lots of reasons why this process-lawyering
>is.  People are trying to do the right thing, using the resources they
>have, in a way to minimise thrash around this topic, and attempting to
>make the process work one way or the other by insisting on
>rule-following is, I submit, quite likely to make things worse.

I used to run the administrative part of the Applications Area 
Directorate.  Some of the reviews performed were about what is 
considered as internationalization.  The experience which I gained 
from that is an understanding of the issues which John mentioned [1].

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/i18nrp/current/msg00142.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email