Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13)

["Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com>]

Title: Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13)

(editor hat off)

 

The word community was already present or I would have replaced it. The formulation ‘frowned upon’ also was already extant and was meant to give a sense of disapproval without actually saying anything normative.

 

Addison

 

Addison Phillips

Globalization Architect -- Lab126

 

Internationalization is not a feature.

It is an architecture.

 

From: Kent Karlsson [mailto:kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 10:45 AM
To: Phillips, Addison; Peter Constable; Mark Davis; Martin J. Dürst
Cc: LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #61: Problem with MAY in 3.5 on Description errata(Apps #13)

 

I would suggest deleting "by the community", since that does not seem
to play any essential role in this paragraph, and some (Mark at least, IIRC)
found a reference to the "community" objectionable. Personally, I don't
like the formulation "frowned upon" either, but no-one else has complained...


    /kent k


Den 2009-06-11 19.32, skrev "Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com>:

--
<t>The 'Description' field itself is not guaranteed to be stable and
MAY be modified via the registration process. Errata
corrections or clarifications of intent are most typical.
Attempts to provide translations or transcriptions of entries
in the registry itself will probably be frowned upon by the community or
rejected outright, as changes of this nature have an impact on the
provisions in <xref target="ianastability"></xref>.</t>
--