Re: [Slim] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-19: (with COMMENT)

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

At 4:02 PM -0500 1/11/18, Paul Kyzivat wrote:

>  On 1/10/18 3:02 PM, Gunnar Hellström wrote:
>>  Den 2018-01-10 kl. 16:51, skrev Paul Kyzivat:
>>>  Gunnar,
>>>
>>>  I would like to understand your thinking 
>>> about how the language indications will be 
>>> used. Your comments below suggest to me that 
>>> you are assuming that they will be exposed to 
>>> the end users through a UI. If that is not 
>>> the case then order of preference of one 
>>> language over another won't have any 
>>> influence over how the session proceeds.
>>  Yes, it is in most applications the human end 
>> users who are expected to produce and 
>> understand the negotiated language(s). 
>> Therefore the final result of the negotiation 
>> must be presented to the users. (or, in less 
>> common automatic conversation cases, fed to an 
>> automata for generating the agreed language).
>>  We say that this must happen, but it is not 
>> the task of the draft to say how.
>>
>>  Examples:
>>
>>  If it is a regular conversational call 
>> application, it could present what the 
>> application regards to be the best match on 
>> the screen: "Talk English, expect English 
>> text".
>>  That prepares the users for how the call is best started.
>>
>>  Alternatively, the answering party can be 
>> provided with options for selection among the 
>> common languages before the call is answered. 
>> E.g.
>>  "The far end user can receive ASL __ and 
>> written English __, which do you want to 
>> produce?"
>>  "The far end user can produce ASL ___ and 
>> written English ___, which do you want to 
>> receive?"
>>  The result goes into the coding of the hlang attributes in the answer.
>>  The answer will be presented to the offeror on the screen by e.g.
>>  "Sign ASL, prepare to receive ASL".
>>
>>  By following the advice on the screen, the 
>> call will start smoothly. Nothing prevents the 
>> users to vary the use of languages and media 
>> by mutual agreement after the initial exchange 
>> during the call.
>>
>>  Wide variations from these examples are imaginable.
>>  Gunnar
>
>  While this sounds helpful, it isn't current 
> practice. I don't know what it will take make 
> it common practice. Perhaps the draft should 
> note this as an issue.

I'd rather leave this for other documents.  For 
example, Gunner has a few drafts that build on 
this one.

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
One should always be a little improbable.          --Oscar Wilde