At 10:10 PM -0400 10/11/06, John Cowan wrote: >Martin Duerst scripsit: > >> >Note that a prior issue for the RA and the JAC to consider is what >> >character set should be allowed in language names used in the 639 >> >standards. If you would like to submit feedback in that regard, it >> >should probably go to the JAC via Michael Everson -- IIRC he is IETF >> >liaison to the JAC. >> >> There is no such record on the relevant page >> (http://www.ietf.org/liaisonActivities.html). > >That is to say, he is the person who represents IETF concerns on the JAC, >not vice versa. By the same token, I am the person who represents IETF >concerns to the Lojban community. No one has to make these roles >official. > They do need to be made official if you represent the IETF; you may represent your experience (including your experience of the IETF) in any way you like. It sounds like you meant the second. "Liaison", though, has a fairly specific meaning in our discussions of relationships to other bodies, and it does tend to imply "represent the IETF" and that implies "appointed by the IAB". regards, Ted Hardie _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at 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.