IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Terminology] TERM & NISTIR 8366

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 18 May 2021 07:45 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: terminology@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: terminology@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324913A0FE2 for <terminology@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 May 2021 00:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 v6yKBtWxs4f3 for <terminology@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 May 2021 00:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (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 9302B3A0FDF for <terminology@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 May 2021 00:45:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [212.68.24.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01AFC600C7E for <terminology@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 May 2021 10:45:41 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1621323942; bh=T95qzx2qfgZVffJS/eg0j1mUl3rZOLMA0TihzVcDC40=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To; b=w6bPmKg8xfZKXB1RjnNfagYe24tS/+m7b1xcnupDH0QybD4RoAoKP9aI5dzDBpxDm O6NRseBbbc5b3PRC/TYe6gOO2bXR/oXzeGvwKi/Qcyl/bTBasepLsOGj6jSEPCkusZ DhBv7O1Y1eBPFNaGFGNaP5A/xryr6LiG4/xm0MPk=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_02019221-5906-45C5-BDBE-571F419430E9"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.80.0.2.43\))
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 10:45:40 +0300
References: <2C2B2441-DFE2-4C9F-AC21-48B6A8736329@isoc.org> <5D6D75AB-1E9E-4CB3-A86B-6D8EAA37BB14@yahoo.co.uk> <C089DE1B-61FF-4091-A4D7-0F33ED05A565@akamai.com> <32ACE23D-1C5E-4203-B5E0-D0F58B02803E@eggert.org>
To: "terminology@ietf.org" <terminology@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <32ACE23D-1C5E-4203-B5E0-D0F58B02803E@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <881BCDF9-9673-470D-8DD4-7E362D771DB6@eggert.org>
X-MailScanner-ID: 01AFC600C7E.A2FDC
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/FQ-TQSdUd28rWx-A5l2_hZ7l0aU>
Subject: Re: [Terminology] TERM & NISTIR 8366
X-BeenThere: terminology@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents <terminology.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/terminology>, <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/terminology/>
List-Post: <mailto:terminology@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/terminology>, <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 07:45:56 -0000

Hi,

On 2021-5-6, at 11:04, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
> I plan to leave the TERM group in its current state (as "chartering") at least until the IESG statement pointing to NISTIR 8366 is out, I've sent NIST a liaison statement informing them of our use of NISTIR 8366, and have gotten acknowledgements from the various other RFC streams and the RFC Editor that they have received the IESG's suggestion to put similar guidance in place.

the IESG statement is out (https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/on-inclusive-language), the liaison to NIST was sent (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1740/), and I encouraged the owners of other RFC streams as well as the RFC Editor to issue similar guidance, as per the IESG statement. The RFC Editor informed me that the web style guide has been updated already (https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/), and most other RFC stream owners are discussing similar measures.

I am hence planning to abandon chartering of TERM in the datatracker shortly. The terminology@ietf.org mailing list will remain active for any related discussions.

Lars Eggert
IETF Chair

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email