IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Fwd: [I18ndir] I18ndir last call review of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Wed, 02 March 2022 05:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@lear.ch>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 976773A0917 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 21:55:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=lear.ch
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 PDCUMoiuqnfn for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 21:55:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [185.32.222.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B05DE3A118D for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 21:55:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.227] (77-58-144-232.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.58.144.232]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 2225tb7D580785 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 06:55:37 +0100
Authentication-Results: upstairs.ofcourseimright.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lear.ch
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1646200538; bh=vc2tFlENKDDCHsxtRXcA5hkbJgNdgQWCErFUo77yG+E=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=oRvmu4ZJRohQ8JahAnj1N4QdtJQbDExFxra8aMHZF7ZrypdOEY/OIPKpo18yEx7mv d8byRn3l+Kb/DtkK2VwZhds+30g9PYA+CAnitt3dAlXuVXEy3aq2d1z2Xs00Lce+uS 1B8rpJoj7KmuJCySHMsHkxyv1e+FNyWs4G2UlC/w=
Message-ID: <2f7fc97e-b28e-b1fa-f583-726c30c3ddb6@lear.ch>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2022 06:55:36 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "rfced-future@iab.org" <rfced-future@iab.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
References: <5231BEDE2E5FB8C502855970@PSB> <46de5830-990a-30bf-57fb-ddbc78cbb1fc@stpeter.im> <3c4497ed-d476-16bc-9aa1-354cd082830e@stpeter.im>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
In-Reply-To: <3c4497ed-d476-16bc-9aa1-354cd082830e@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------BZ3N5phbQygSRotKEi6i3IEJ"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/u1ZPgvMZPfT3J4z7GLo7OZ37ZpM>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Fwd: [I18ndir] I18ndir last call review of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2022 05:55:47 -0000

On 02.03.22 01:02, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>
> Although I agree that internationalization issues can be especially 
> thorny, I wonder if this document should say something more generally. 
> (For instance, another example might be YANG modules, which AIUI in 
> the past have caused some adjustments to the editorial process.)
>
> This could be defined in a new RPC responsibility within section 4.3, 
> such as:
>
>    8. Conferring with relevant experts regarding particular kinds of
>       content when publishing RFCs or helping to define policies for the
>       Series; such topics might include internationalization and
>       localization [RFC 7997], graphical formats such as SVG [RFC 7966],
>       and structured content such as YANG modules [RFC 7950]. 


That is one reason to have an RSCE.

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email