Re: WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 13 April 2021 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 69BC13A25E4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 13:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=uaARSgGA; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=r7em1KY3
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 jvMtgk4QQP-U for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 13:01:35 -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 A06D63A25B6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 13:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 58545 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2021 20:01:29 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:reply-to:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=e4af.6075f899.k2104; bh=1XYBonggRQLQxzU3QI3W4eGsmvGuo7GaK/qf391FOQ8=; b=uaARSgGAtN/xL4RN40jd/3CByKVhLcuTKZX3zwdFKqyS3c2EtAGV1eWwhxJ0nKZfL7EmWno8vzPCxnrik60QNn8g7ieMhURmJJ5C+N871j1Ud7STwfvvQT9TyL9gPIz07a1xGWnOqjNNN8sZCBoQHwew09qav+eK6bQMAKsr5lS9KnaDas5F1EF/vPHlOfzmLLva5DaAeksO8NWzHLyFMyetRgWX56pinauq8yOy4iCgLGEKjKIcRPpnLShE3O0PU5MwzD2E5XhA1EO0S/qAQL1roBO7GKCmHotTibmFxv/LttOchW3n5yEsmYYNTgG0e9v1EFa1pQevQZqEKrjBQg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:reply-to:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=e4af.6075f899.k2104; bh=1XYBonggRQLQxzU3QI3W4eGsmvGuo7GaK/qf391FOQ8=; b=r7em1KY3IomdFYEgUwLj7gHvv/r0Md6QN+IgqofmPS+zEyf4XzZ3LDssQhxn6FFiSKfGohPhUuNTFbQP/L496KNSITR96RUvmEnO38B1esVsBKbIJPIbtBWrVojGg6F+3QHG1bm2XXu0h8KuBe4ATqRHJoOvcgxJw38MYJIYod24AprP9+j14tqfpN/h3Qhu8KC7R06kOJADlw0H7XKTtzDVa2kqzmuv0/OH38djlL0JqJzGVISK3Na97oTAGkoGDIQX+7FjNp2vMIWO2Nmf2lMylHXHKB+9mtBtFWlyLpu7UZqNvMalB3iXNPVH8dISN7MPU9+6LxsWTdIcPiNcpw==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 13 Apr 2021 20:01:29 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id D5C3472D2739; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:01:27 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 13 Apr 2021 16:01:27 -0400
Message-Id: <20210413200128.D5C3472D2739@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
Reply-To: gendispatch@ietf.org
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)
In-Reply-To: <C6775D23-1498-4E40-89BF-622C36A4DFE5@akamai.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qXh5xfCFQgGIB9_MWnwfmDmimDA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:01:47 -0000

It appears that Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>I believe it is important for the IETF to say something that has the force of IETF consensus behind it.  Instructions to the RFC Editor have not, and I would
>be against doing so in this case because the lack of consensus makes the editorial changes less well-justified.
>
>If the consensus is that we should not do this, I would be highly disappointed, but I would accept it as a consensus decision.

Language policing is not part of the RFC Editor's job.  If the IETF wants to set language standards, that is fine,
but it is up to the IETF itself to follow and if need be enforce those standards, not anyone else.

R's,
John