IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] Fixing names in references to old RFCs

Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Thu, 18 February 2021 10:04 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51B33A0EFA; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ej6ib2vBnZaD; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65FF23A0EF4; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8BAF40720; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A358F40720 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iktl7QOPOuKu for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 246AAF40716 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:04:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p200300dee71fe6005448b55f7a0f3ed6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e71f:e600:5448:b55f:7a0f:3ed6]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1lCgAb-0002H6-B9; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:04:25 +0100
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <6a08f9e7-00e3-4c21-8619-400890b8ef98@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:04:23 +0100
Message-Id: <EA5B565E-898A-475C-B570-19CF2AD0B20C@kuehlewind.net>
References: <c6acbb0e-e96a-4b88-9b41-8cc5e03773bc@www.fastmail.com> <1ca206fd-dfe0-4c23-4161-b5cbd65dd841@gmx.de> <9070FA66-ECC7-4C82-8DEF-30CAEE473894@tzi.org> <9578884e-8437-239f-5dc2-cb4c153a9e4e@gmx.de> <6a08f9e7-00e3-4c21-8619-400890b8ef98@www.fastmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1613642678;d37f7800;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1lCgAb-0002H6-B9
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Fixing names in references to old RFCs
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Hi Martin, hi all,

> On 18. Feb 2021, at 09:57, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
> 
> For the moment however, I just want to know if manually rewriting oe to ö would be a reasonable thing to do.  I think that it would.

I don’t think I have strong opinion on the general topic, but as someone with an Umlaut in my own name, I'm not sure I would recommend to just do it. Given this problem has existed for a long time I know people who have used the oe variant in publications consistently in the past and prefer to keep it that way.

For me personally I try to use ü where possible but I don’t might the ue form because that is actually equivalent in German (and I often still have to use when I buy flight ticket and stuff). I know that’s really confusing for non-Germans (also given this is not the notation used in other countries that have Umlaute) but changing it in the reference while still having it different in the original document seems equally confusing to me.

Just my 2c.

Mirja



_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email