IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Possible BofF question -- I18n (was: Re: Possible OBF question -- I18n)

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Thu, 31 May 2018 18:25 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79DA712FAC2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2018 11:25:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 yrjIRKw01x24 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2018 11:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FB1812F4CD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 May 2018 11:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1fOSGN-000ENR-Lz; Thu, 31 May 2018 14:25:27 -0400
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:25:20 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
cc: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Possible BofF question -- I18n (was: Re: Possible OBF question -- I18n)
Message-ID: <12688A44E2C211095F552F01@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEHFrVGBPtdKA8KMoUZqX07ftOcn7mMYPT67rVXzLqfXEQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180530231127.17198276FEE3@ary.qy> <071E6235FE7B088A2B56A238@PSB> <0093E2CD-670E-47B6-A286-4FDEB140FAD9@frobbit.se> <15D103030DE952C9507BA134@PSB> <CAF4+nEHFrVGBPtdKA8KMoUZqX07ftOcn7mMYPT67rVXzLqfXEQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hbNy06mrLpZ2r3A7aPWUwnPAFe4>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:25:38 -0000

Don,

Thanks.  Had forgotten that one.   The fact that there are
successful precedents is definitely good news.

   john


--On Thursday, May 31, 2018 14:04 -0400 Donald Eastlake
<d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 9:51 AM, John C Klensin
> <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>> 
>> ...
>> 
>> I could see a "joint development" collaboration between the
>> IETF and some other SDO(s) working together and
>> cross-checking each other's work --not merely cross-area, but
>> cross-SDO-- but that IETF has never been able to pull one of
>> those off before and, AFAIK, has never expressed much
>> interest in doing so.  Even if
> 
> I disagree. I was co-chair of the joint IETF/W3C XMLDSIG WG
> which I believe was reasonably successful.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email