Re: [Slim] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-22: (with COMMENT)

Paul Kyzivat <> Wed, 10 January 2018 16:15 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDEA112D945 for <>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:15:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yKr23lYsg9hW for <>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:15:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D8FA12D959 for <>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:15:07 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 1207440c-e35ff70000000ab3-20-5a563c08126a
Received: from (OUTGOING-ALUM.MIT.EDU []) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id FA.50.02739.90C365A5; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:15:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from PaulKyzivatsMBP.localdomain ( []) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as pkyzivat@ALUM.MIT.EDU) by (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w0AGF3ro031779 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:15:04 -0500
References: <>
From: Paul Kyzivat <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:15:03 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrJIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixO6iqMtlExZl0Hmc02Lmh042B0aPJUt+ MgUwRnHZpKTmZJalFunbJXBlPPi8m7XgIEfF9sZb7A2Mz9i6GDk5JARMJJZMWw1kc3EICexg kth2Zj8zhPOVSeLW3x+sIFXCApkS939MZwGxRQQEJb73zGDqYuQAKvKVWNBiDxJmE9CSmHPo P1gJr4C9xPK321lASlgEVCUmzFEACYsKpEm8eraDGaJEUOLkzCdg5ZwCfhILn/SB2cwCZhLz Nj9khrDFJW49mc8EYctLbH87h3kCI/8sJO2zkLTMQtIyC0nLAkaWVYxyiTmlubq5iZk5xanJ usXJiXl5qUW6hnq5mSV6qSmlmxghIcmzg/HbOplDjAIcjEo8vAzCYVFCrIllxZW5hxglOZiU RHkDOUOjhPiS8lMqMxKLM+KLSnNSiw8xSnAwK4nwOpkDlfOmJFZWpRblw6SkOViUxHlVl6j7 CQmkJ5akZqemFqQWwWRlODiUJHhfWQE1ChalpqdWpGXmlCCkmTg4QYbzAA0XsAYZXlyQmFuc mQ6RP8VoydHTc+MPE8ejG3eB5LOZrxuYhVjy8vNSpcR5WUEaBEAaMkrz4GbCUswrRnGgF4V5 40GqeIDpCW7qK6CFTEALz28MBVlYkoiQkmpgXMi+dFON/LI/bMFzrmVaPrjdZJ/9dcIn45JU 0a6WyRwLrmdkz62UPv5Oe++2bgaGfU8fXrrx9cY25uYs5+RGwyz2z3b60RM/3/7Dvi5ZyWt3 19uLDC/1NoQaT970codR25fXqn+WMvRm2+YG1jjPONC6TP5B1vvVvzXmhfT4Ogl53lA8HdCk rsRSnJFoqMVcVJwIAFBCLz4MAwAA
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Slim] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-22: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Selection of Language for Internet Media <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:15:15 -0000

On 1/9/18 11:21 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:

> - 5.1, paragraph 2:  Can you elaborate on the motivation to have a separate
> hlang-send and hlang-recv parameter vs having a single language parameter and
> instead setting the stream to send or receive only, especially in light of the
> recommendation to set both directions the same for bi-directional language
> selection? I don't mean to dispute that approach; I just think a bit more
> explanation of the design choice would be helpful to the reader.  I can imagine
> some use cases, for example a speech-impaired person who does not plan to speak
> on a video call may still wish to send video to show facial expressions, etc.
> (I just re-read the discussion resulting from Ekr's comments, and recognize
> that this overlaps heavily with that.)

There are cases where what you suggest won't work. E.g., Sign language 
is embedded in video, but it isn't the sole purpose of the video. If I 
can understand sign language but not do it myself, I wouldn't want to 
indicate that by refusing to send video.