Hi - I've seen no support for Jefsey's latest proposal, so this issue remains closed with a "rejected" status. Randy, ltru co-chair ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Constable" <petercon at microsoft.com> To: <ltru at ietf.org> Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 7:41 AM Subject: RE: [Ltru] ISO 11173 (non) alignment in main draft > From: ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org] On > Behalf Of r&d afrac > Proposed choice (or anyone can better the texts if respecting their > intent). The target is clarity. > > (a) "Even if the registry documented in this memo relates in part to ISO > codes it is not aligned on ISO 11173 provisions." > > (b) "The registry documented in this memo relates in part to ISO codes and > SHOULD respect their alignment on ISO 11173 provisions as they develop." I strongly object to both wordings. Apart from the typo (referring to a standard on plastics), "aligned on ISO 11179 provisions" is thoroughly ambiguous, and nothing of particular use is contributed. Indeed, I find both to introduce problems: - The first wording contributes nothing other than to inform users of how this registry relates to ISO 11179, which assessment should not be stated unless this or a subsequent WG reviews a written analysis of the same. - The second wording imposes a requirement on IANA with no guidance whatsoever on how it should be fulfilled; moreover, it imposes a vaguely-stated requirement that could permit future interpretation requiring changes in the specification in which it would be contained in ways that are completely unforeseen. We have been over the role of ISO 11179 in relation to this draft before and concluded that no reference to it was required. I would like to see this matter put to rest. Peter Constable _______________________________________________ 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
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.