Re: [precis] terminology

[[e-mail], [e-mail]]

(top post) 

Jefsey,

Thanks.  The notice was already forward to a few other lists,
which I hope I have trimmed.   Any discussion of the
appropriateness of doing this should continue on the
apps-discuss list, as requested by Barry, and not cross-posted.
I would prefer that any substantive comments be deferred until
after AppsAWG makes a decision about discussion venue and then
sent to their list (if they decide to take the document on).  In
the interim, substantive or editorial comments may be sent to
Paul and myself at [e-mail] if
needed.  Neither he nor I have time to track multiple lists for
comments so comments to random lists, or long distribution lists
are likely to get lost -- please, everyone, don't do a multiple
posting and then complain that your comments were lost.

Substantive comment for planning purposes: Whether it ends up
being posted as draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3536bis-00 or as
draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis-02 (with the version after that posted
as draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3536-00), the main substantive change
between that version and the current draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis-01
will be the addition of an extended description of the term
"variant" (used in domain name contexts).  Wisely or not, the
use of that term in various context has been expanded
significantly beyond the definition in RFC 3743.   Those whose
work involves that term, or notions of "equivalence" in domain
names, will want to look at the description carefully.  Each new
version of course also includes a selection of editorial
improvements and less significant fixes.

     john

p.s. I note that the "the traditional wiki working transcript"
referred to in your note contains several significant errors and
that we are unlikely to be able to have a useful discussion or
incorporate changes based on that version.   I strongly suggest
that people use
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis/ as the
relevant discussion/ reading version instead.


--On Thursday, April 21, 2011 13:49 +0200 jefsey
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Dear IUsers,
> Barry Leiba, WG/APPSAWG Chair has sent the following most
> important mail for us:
> 
>> "Paul Hoffman and John Klensin have undertaken to update RFC
>> 3536,  which specified terminology for use in
>> internationalization-related  documents and discussions.  The
>> editors, appsawg chairs, and  Applications Area directors
>> think the document needs broad review,  and propose to make
>> it an appsawg document.
>> You can find the document here:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis/
>> The editors will soon submit an updated version, and await a 
>> decision on accepting the document into appsawg before doing 
>> that.  We ask that anyone with a stake in
>> internationalization  review the current version and state
>> any objections to making this  an appsawg document by 29
>> April.
>> You may, or course, also send comments on the document at
>> this point  to the editors and/or the apps-discuss list.
>> Remember that there  are changes queued, so you might bring
>> up points that they're  already planning to change/correct.
>> The reply-to on this message is set to the apps-discuss list 
>> <[e-mail]>.  Please put all responses and
>> discussion there.
> 
> This terminology is obviously going to be the mutual
> understanding bridge between the IETF and the IUTF
> communities.

>...