IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> Wed, 07 April 2021 16:12 UTC

Return-Path: <leifj@mnt.se>
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 404293A1F64 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 09:12:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnt-se.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 6E89H-YHNzXQ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 09:12:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CF4F3A1F63 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 09:12:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id z8so21329798ljm.12 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Apr 2021 09:12:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnt-se.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=L9Juyta9E+LQPakgDeDiKSJxeemxMHoFYt1WOuVtEus=; b=EAScIBiPWBTHmmSvsbHUMnLk+E/Y06ds+YmH7wr9FnWzi6s7nJydD53gE7wNwsJR5J g2ae8mXCtEz+9orjJWepDOhwhVw7taZQIPSpqukAGeMn7Mav7neZMjC48waBrcfO6trg M238X6v3tLUrg3Ajyj/OXKNbxhSTqfRsStUtu4fDoz84Zd5MrhmOwTgd8P36XB145Y8I fwu2prinOQNWPABfLML45RUOn4Tl1su1kblA+FdQ8whFYnAMtTKH12EN6QMzWqT5JltS jkNUfC+mbWcVZrAKuYAD/Rdz/bo//ohjAmDhilm3BkO1H5qSGxvFsUpMB27QbR6xzAVR Ns4Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=L9Juyta9E+LQPakgDeDiKSJxeemxMHoFYt1WOuVtEus=; b=caVtlRkdaRXMwmZ56ev1jvJXopIk6vMX+IKMFwCtOb6pjDnKvL7T174AnKtdEFR0b6 mkY9i+hjECCY2FScrPHUav6VwYR7R11S4qdEvvhigL3cJVs+pV67siLIuWAoZLwu76KS jj390lUrDliqYESZ83rZiK66fhLFX7jJAHUNVJqqCnYMbTuXYHli/D2wI8FBnOsY+MRc z5sHWMpsdJKu6J6sBnnsBgZbGHw2pp1fX+hTSCsSZqdkP0ZqT2v8e3nNKhjRUOdsIW7o w7mI206yNggZieQGdzN5W0e4NFFLRcnNQh05EKYZWgf6gTZILDJB6jpyqOND9my6vubm EhyQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Dkhag+EDvUHwfl4BSial2BYV9vbRCv9Egoxr80Jut/A7vmZD2 DN+Jfxv+wHzaC0w/jQvhw5XNm9C3bQR7mw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy2KUtoc7A9gGwPP0GDhOFkAR8U59WLm4+FOzPpdkn/8TgLF6lPRT2pntTLPsujpX1MGfmdZA==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8193:: with SMTP id e19mr2601052ljg.445.1617811935236; Wed, 07 Apr 2021 09:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.131] (h-98-128-229-174.NA.cust.bahnhof.se. [98.128.229.174]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c9sm2598450lfv.10.2021.04.07.09.12.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 07 Apr 2021 09:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: WG Review: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents (term)
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 18:12:13 +0200
Message-Id: <A5F8069C-E6F7-4DA4-8C9F-665EEECFFE13@mnt.se>
References: <16D2311D-D0BA-4B0B-A8D1-A4CDD9F1DC92@gmail.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <16D2311D-D0BA-4B0B-A8D1-A4CDD9F1DC92@gmail.com>
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18D61)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/y07nycUmwgvVp1aGio0uwm5qy5s>
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: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 16:12:20 -0000


Skickat från min iPhone

> 7 apr. 2021 kl. 14:40 skrev Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 6 Apr 2021, at 21:58, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> but I also believe
>> that the IESG should consider not only whether there is consensus on the
>> charter text, but also the basic question whether this issue should be
>> handled by the IETF at all, rather than by the RFC Editor. There is a
>> strong case for the latter.
>> 
>> Regards
>>  Brian Carpenter
> 
> Exactly my thoughts.
> 
> We engineers are good at protocol engineering we should stick to that.
> 
> The RFC Editor is good with words and for years have been quietly steering us toward better ways to express our thoughts. Let’s leave them to do that.
> 
> As to inclusion and the supporting organisational change, there are professional experts out there that know far more than us, we should contract them to make a study and place recommendations before the IETF community.
> 
> Let’s stick to our core competence and get help with the other stuff.
> 
> - Stewart
> 
> 

+1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email