IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Some more thoughts about language and what to do next

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 31 July 2020 20:34 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 841623A0B0C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 nxcUrk5dMrcv for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:34:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com (mail-pl1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]) (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 E134B3A0855 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id t10so12624869plz.10 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1NUhSiTiKGS/4AhrPIzQsL1m8QPzGe+PFBoDl8PReYg=; b=QPOH36hannpb/Gp1150wSdlmj3JVJ3B1pKlBfDUbLFpNJEJ+UWVuAElfbF8L5+ibYF 2CuvdiR2QJw1gs1cQ9DxHehbUyC9d1iYL7IySgtVW5gmoQ4mHskA+cK9IUryt98ss5LB 4YZ1aWUnB8aj2JA9BkNXGzx85X0sU3MYSlRZp33voz/mGKJf8PtDDl6GZDutD3vD6QEd fQaYJ8gKcd2JSqmjbSIRuME4bE1s+XjfQEgJLOxm/wF1tjRa55S16/zG9w3XI3w2k2ia BQ0CGuKDVX4Ai6LII7Ah2f/NWR6yYTpEg7LR34/mPLsOLDaYUdFYsXOeJe8JtLHb4Ztn k+Uw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1NUhSiTiKGS/4AhrPIzQsL1m8QPzGe+PFBoDl8PReYg=; b=NR6GwVtsYuaYcOrP0EiOJT8uKmkOr6uiQajpz2gE+lOFxahzVe9PDUE/5jUCEw0qLr AD5nWYfONJcHJy+07OfK7ujlHBMObcUT3gupZ5pw/jL8sB1M9sU0hIc6eKlX5MxJbaay Ug+4jo0eMb/EUsavW/w2SC5Hue14fAf0ZqIfD/yciOYMyaXjSYJnJGVLUGIgwas/YhB/ FPyY6ulmUVQFJ+YRrgFHbrGT5pdSA8H6cqd7Vfz1I7VSz+Ni6n1uWNVu6DYJXpZQLgzM cQVfx1M2KfxU4ko+Goibw1dCqKGEnfnsm4DCAF7z365J00k5LAvXu6VWA9E4V1ldF2Ao a8Hg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533w/fT1ByBwJW9IzExre758Xx+cyNRz6p9wZCAt/FLm0rtXyUlA VsYLiefaXaaORKgOjTPCJkvIYP/dKG4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzyjJQaGvKDqOncSJP1I4VERKBGy6Is90Lsan1JJozW95VDQY7OuROokhOTeVqEtz7+WwpWSw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b113:: with SMTP id q19mr5024834plr.170.1596227675034; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z8sm11442151pgz.7.2020.07.31.13.34.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Some more thoughts about language and what to do next
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Cc: The IETF List <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <09474801-7189-4C01-8242-163454C3E936@cisco.com> <20200731140536.GQ3100@localhost> <2E217C0C-2FD9-4420-BEB7-B62ED53F0B8C@cisco.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <f5ca757e-2108-c97c-df7d-b6a5420bce15@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2020 08:34:31 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2E217C0C-2FD9-4420-BEB7-B62ED53F0B8C@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/zYDvysYL-M4sJf7BB1eA5UdMFTI>
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 20:34:39 -0000

On 01-Aug-20 02:21, Eliot Lear wrote:
...
> I think we’re talking about two different things- how we speak on list, and what goes into our drafts and RFCs.  I’m suggesting general guidance to working groups as a BCP (no MUSTs but guidance), and just use the existing process to avoid terminology that one might expect to be offensive.
> 
> At the same time, let’s seek more guidance about all of this from experts and develop a real decision framework that is based on firm ground, as it were.  Once we get that we iterate.

Yes, but our source of expertise related to writing and publishing is surely already clear: the RFC Editor service. I am at a loss to understand why we're discussing this as an IETF issue alone. So I don't think a BCP is called for, but guidance from the RFC Editor, applying to all RFC streams. The vehicle for that exists: the RFC Editor style guide. It needs a new chapter.

I'm very happy with the IESG stating that IETF documents should avoid oppressive or exclusionary language. But I believe that we should go forward by requesting the RFC Editor to provide guidance and possibly tools to achieve this. Since all RFCs start as I-Ds, the guidance and tools would obviously apply to I-Ds as well as RFCs.

Regards
    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email