Re: [VCARDDAV] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6350 (7856)

[Simon Perreault <[e-mail]>]

This interpretation matches my recollection of discussions at the time. 
I agree that removing the word "biological" would better represent what 
I remember consensus to have been.

Simon

Le 2024-03-18 à 14:28, Ryan Castellucci a écrit :
> // I have replaced Simon's email address with one I believe to be current
>
> Per discussions at the time, e.g.
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/vcarddav/ABQ2l80UXn61mMgJR-OOPq2VXqk/ 
>
>
> sentiment seemed to be in favor of using "SEX" in a trans-inclusive way,
> however the language was not revised accordingly.
>
> There appears to have been no discussion of whether use of the word
> "biological" was appropriate.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan
>
> On 2024-03-18 18:03, RFC Errata System wrote:
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6350,
>> "vCard Format Specification".
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7856
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Technical
>> Reported by: Ryan Castellucci <[e-mail]>
>>
>> Section: 6.2.7
>>
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>>    Special notes:  The components correspond, in sequence, to the sex
>>       (biological), and gender identity.  Each component is optional.
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>>    Special notes:  The components correspond, in sequence, to the sex
>>       and gender identity.  Each component is optional.
>>
>> Notes
>> -----
>> The term "biological" in regards to sex does not have a widely agreed
>> upon meaning, and is primarily used to discriminate against
>> transgender people.
>>
>> Including the "biological" qualifier serves no purpose.
>>
>> Instructions:
>> -------------
>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
>> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
>> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC6350 (draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-22)
>> --------------------------------------
>> Title               : vCard Format Specification
>> Publication Date    : August 2011
>> Author(s)           : S. Perreault
>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>> Source              : vCard and CardDAV
>> Stream              : IETF
>> Verifying Party     : IESG