Re: [Ltru] add internationalization considerations to initial registry draft?

[Erkki Kolehmainen <erkki.kolehmainen at kotus.fi>]

Re attached: I don't believe that the addition is technically necessary, 
nor is it particularly helpful as a clarification.

Erkki I. Kolehmainen (RILF)

Randy Presuhn wrote:

> Hi -
>
> We're in second working group last call.  Jefsey has kindly provided
> specific text he would like added to the initial registry draft, which is
> planned to be submitted for consideration for publication as an Informational
> RFC.  Does the WG believe that this addition is technically necessary?
>
> Randy, ltru co-chair
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: r&d afrac <rd at afrac.org>
> Sent: Aug 5, 2005 6:55 AM
> To: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>, ltru at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] add internationalization considerations to initial  registry draft?
>
> Dear Randy,
>
> At 18:45 04/08/2005, Randy Presuhn wrote:
>
> > It's not clear to me how one would apply the recommendations of RFC 2277
> > in this case.  Could you suggest some meaningful text to go in the
> > internationalizations considerations section you request?  Unless such 
> > text adds
> > significant technical value to the document, I would argue against making such
> > a change at this late stage in the process.  Since the only use of the 
> > contents
> > of this document is to initialize the IANA registry, I believe any 
> > internationalization
> > considerations would belong in the registry document, rather than here.
>
> I suppose you are right.
> But it is rather odd to document all the languages and the scripts of the 
> world in ASCII without explaning why. Some people could think it is because 
> of a natural superiority of the Anglicanus Mens.
>
>
> > I note that both the abstract and the document text are quite clear that they
> > are talking about the IANA registry, so I believe the editor faithfully 
> > applied the
> > change I (not Addison, as you write) suggested.
>
> Oh! I know that you asked to make sure you would block one of my remarks, 
> just in case. Addison said he did it. What I say is that the correction is 
> in the Abstract only. The IANA exclusive is not repeated in the text.
>
>
> > On the issue of ISO 11173 alignment, this issue is OLD and 
> > rejected.  Reopening
> > at this time has not been justified.
>
> I just wanted to make sure you would confirm it, because the text still 
> could be construed as permitting such an alignment. May be this could be 
> indicated. I suggest the following text:
>
> "This document establishes an independent registry. This registry is not 
> intended to be related to any registry, database or content not documented 
> in this document."
>
> I suppose this is what you want to say.
> jfc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru