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

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Wed, 10 January 2018 16:39 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: slim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: slim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CBC8129C6B for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:39:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.89
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] 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 rZngnMTrePBK for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:39:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D24DA12D96A for <slim@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:39:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.1.105] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w0AGdCG8031993 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:39:13 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.105]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <D361AF1D-5EDA-466A-93E2-3F0830D75D19@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9966BDC4-6589-421C-AD42-E1E2D13389A5"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:39:11 -0600
In-Reply-To: <76085ca0-3203-bf78-4d30-e90a16abc276@alum.mit.edu>
Cc: slim@ietf.org
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
References: <151555808122.21584.8379796998643581181.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <76085ca0-3203-bf78-4d30-e90a16abc276@alum.mit.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/slim/kJLycZisRLy2rtTu3Z_reyO5OZ0>
Subject: Re: [Slim] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language-22: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: slim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Selection of Language for Internet Media <slim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/slim>, <mailto:slim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/slim/>
List-Post: <mailto:slim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:slim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim>, <mailto:slim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:39:19 -0000


> On Jan 10, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> 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.

To be clear, all I was suggesting was a brief explanation of the design choice, not a change in that choice.

> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SLIM mailing list
> SLIM@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim