RE: RFC Editor Function SOW Review

Exactly.   

Where Dave and I disagree, I think, is that I consider getting
from "technically correct and coherent but not in English that
is acceptable to non-native speakers who primary language also
differs from that of the author/editor" to be a community
responsibility, while Dave considers it a WG (or other advocacy
group) one... At least I hope I have that right.  

That work is arguably best done by professionals because it
requires considerable skill; skill that improves with experience.

There are several reasons I want to see it handled as a
community responsibility rather than as a WG one, but the most
important is that, if people have to be hired to do the work, I
don't want to see our working groups turn into mini-consortia
with their own budgets, funding sources, hired editors, etc.
It seems to me, based on both thought experiments and experience
with other standards bodies, that would lead to side effects we
just do not want.

    john

--On Monday, 24 July, 2006 09:07 -0700 "Fleischman, Eric"
<eric.fleischman@boeing.com> wrote:

> I spent the first many years of my professional life overseas
> working as a Linguist writing and speaking other people's
> languages. Even though my own proficiency was inadequate by
> their standards, I relied upon talented native speakers to
> enhance my publications so that they became well written in
> the target language. This is what the IETF also needs to do.
> 
> The IETF authors needn't be very proficient in English, but
> they need to be proficient enough to coherently explain their
> technical points so that others can understand them. What is
> needed is to ensure that somebody, with the authors'
> oversight, is enlisted to improve the drafts so that the
> ultimate IETF documents themselves are in very good English.
> 
> Because the IETF is now International, all the IETF documents
> must be in well-written English because we now come from so
> many languages and cultures. It is hard enough dealing in
> foreign languages without exacerbating the problem for the
> non-native English speaker by asking them to understand
> garbled versions of English. If it is difficult for the native
> English speaker to understand, it is much worse for the
> non-Native speakers (unless they happen to speak the same
> language as the garbler).
> 
> BTW, some native English speakers also produce horrid
> documents because they are poor writers. These individuals
> also need to leverage editors who can translate their thoughts
> into coherent English.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf