IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 01 June 2018 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 B617512D960 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 09:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=OCCqShiM; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=BC+6WPuI
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 AV2rXgjMhjKJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 09:27:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA68F12D95A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 09:27:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 66596 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2018 16:27:21 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=10422.5b1173e9.k1806; bh=ICFqHuhZ6atmbODR3T6x+g5jonwFfMqiu6/Qk//+ZBA=; b=OCCqShiMBIRKML2Mknomogwdsb5xYwSJZlKfwMUS6gEzJiWCiXwAFWctyKpB2FUFmjyo8T83KeG6UhrimRCmOlRUE1BVrKy/FYivKHQeTpvYFWedkUgvAZm4y6x7DNE5krWPvELAs01xK5Smb9GZzJU4+wnJu/Sauc0oRR0/BAZLiieelwOI1ZRM64rdRWks9L5oM6lo16qjHp0U3TAZdEBkwnpgdB6eRDkCNQybc5zDv1ChveES/DB/V0VGpmmN
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=10422.5b1173e9.k1806; bh=ICFqHuhZ6atmbODR3T6x+g5jonwFfMqiu6/Qk//+ZBA=; b=BC+6WPuI5Hsb6yAwRlCbuyjAfhvJXOOClerHSPIkEP40jb/NgmGeU5gfEcv+X3U38Q3vxNXK6sK4+SRmpETjkS6nujezMVVKlTcSezyw/ZUE+FocJw8HMerKyCr8DNGQ+HnT1yTUn7/bcgLdJjRQcguqlPaoQEG+I3r3UBY0XDV5kg3V372M0zzFHhXmYLNJTpa/TEYLR1NDq0dg2+LhocNkEDuitWrFu7+lXSOwjQkFJDU0gwbPaqgH+XFj4UDQ
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 01 Jun 2018 16:27:21 -0000
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 12:27:20 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1806011219340.7621@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com>
Cc: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Possible BofF question -- I18n (was: Re: Possible OBF question -- I18n)
In-Reply-To: <2584adb9-1622-8b49-7236-ecc7dd374974@mozilla.com>
References: <20180530231127.17198276FEE3@ary.qy> <071E6235FE7B088A2B56A238@PSB> <0093E2CD-670E-47B6-A286-4FDEB140FAD9@frobbit.se> <20180531172228.GF14446@localhost> <383c2404-7beb-63e9-b2b2-e75fd1b174f1@mozilla.com> <20180601041949.GH14446@localhost> <A13FFF23-49BD-459D-8B5B-D3448154EEBC@frobbit.se> <20180601151053.GI14446@localhost> <2584adb9-1622-8b49-7236-ecc7dd374974@mozilla.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/mURmxTHVWdUoL7vw3cbtWWJmFWk>
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: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 16:27:25 -0000

On Fri, 1 Jun 2018, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Require that documents have I18N Considerations sections, require review
>> by an I18N directorate, and you'll see how quickly participants who used
>> to not give a damn about I18 will come around, learn what they have to,
>> and get their I18N work done.  Suddenly the I18N directorate will be in
>> demand.
>
> This is worth considering...

I don't think it's a very good idea.  It'll just lead to useless pro-forma 
language.  It'd be OK if IESG review were to flag drafts and ask whether 
they should say something about I18N.

Like jck, I have to disagree with Nico's assertion that anyone can pick up 
I18N expertise quickly, and also jck's comment that if your experience is 
only with European alphabetic languages, you've barely scratched the 
surface.  It's remarkably subtle.  It needs a particular mindset, in much 
the way that being a crypto expert does.  Different mindset, though.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email