Hi - > From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > Cc: <icar@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 4:54 PM > Subject: Re: Seeking reviewers for language tag registry docs in WG last call > > I am glad Randy Preshun now joins my call for additional expertise. This > Draft is particular: due to its political, cultural and commercial > implications, and their possible impact on the IETF, what is to be > considered is probably more what is not in the Draft than the technical > constraints introduced by the Draft, where I consider that we should simplify. > > A first list of questions is under http://rfc3066.org/review.htm. Readers > should also address these questions. They are important enough to be > considered carefully, with an open mind. IMHO they call for a dedicated > document providing a clear, stable, politically protected IETF framework. > jfc ... Please do not be misled by the domain name of http://rfc3066.org/review.htm That site is not affiliated with the ltru WG or the ietf-languages@xxxxxxxx mailing list that performs the language tag review function described in RFC 3066. I think prospective reviewers' time would be much better spent looking at the actual documents under WG last call, rather than trying to make sense of the stuff at http://rfc3066.org/review.htm The documents under WG last call are http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-09.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-initial-02.txt We'd prefer to have your comments on the documents themselves, rather than reactions to Jefsey's sometimes over-heated polemic. Randy, ltru co-chair _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf