Re: Introduction (was: Re: [Ltru] draft-ietf-ltru-rfc4646bis-08)

I am in fairly weak agreement with Marion over the introductory text. 
The wording about human beings on our planet, past and present, has 
certainly been around since RFC 3066, but RFCs have become more formal 
in their wording (and in other ways) since then.  RFC 4646 is over four 
times as long as 3066 and might call for a different approach.  The 
current wording has also been parodied more than once in other 
documents.

I'm not so sure about putting a Definitions section near the front. 
Like Martin, I've also had trouble with ISO documents that start me off 
with pages of definitions of terms I've never seen before, and no 
context in which to place them.  Usually I look for such reference 
material near the end of a document, not the beginning.  What is 
important is that all such material be in an easy-to-find place.

However, at this stage it is much more important to me that we resolve 
the real technical debate over extlangs, and get the drafts to WG Last 
Call, than to engage in fine-tuning and wordsmithing at this level.  The 
current wording doesn't cause any confusion or misinterpretation.  If we 
weren't already half a year behind schedule, I would probably care more 
about this.

--
Doug Ewell · Fullerton, California, USA · RFC 4645 · UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru