[Slim] Use of "non-sign" term

[Bernard Aboba <[e-mail]>]

Gunnar has made a  proposal for clarification of the language in Section
5.4 that would use "tag for a non-signed language" instead of "non-sign
language":
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/slim/current/msg01192.html

IMHO, this would yield a (slight) improvement in clarity.

At the same time, Gunnar has also found some use of the term "non-sign
language":
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/slim/current/msg01193.html

Such as:
"It's thought that the system could help deaf users make presentations to
non-sign language speaking crowds. "

and

"Several researchers (Corina et al., 1992
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/#R5>; Emmorey et al.,
2004 <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/#R8>; Marshall
and Fink, 2001 <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/#R17>)
have established that different neural systems subserve sign language
production and non-sign language pantomimic _expression_."

It can be argued that the first usage uses non-sign to mean "crowds whose
members do not speak any sign language", which is not the same meaning we
are intending.

However, the second usage appears much closer to our intention.

Gunnar therefore proposes that the text can be left as is, and the only
objection appears to be from Keith.

Given the rather minor nature of the issue and the arguments, I believe WG
census is that it is acceptable for the document to be advanced as is, with
or without Gunnar's proposed change.