On Saturday, August 31, 2013 22:51:48 S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi William, > > At 21:41 31-08-2013, William McCall wrote: > >Just one point that irks me a bit about this draft... this draft > >would imply the violation of the code upon those who do (however > >inadvertently) are 1) Native English speakers and 2) use slang of > >some nature (which is quite arbitrary). I'd ask for the original > >phrasing to be more or less preserved (I see a few wording changes > >worthwhile) to avoid the implied absurdity. > > > >The application of Lars' comment would potentially provide for > >penalty here, so I think it is worthwhile to fight this point now. > > The original phrasing is as follows: > > "English is the de facto language of the IETF, but it is not the > native language of many IETF participants. Native English > speakers attempt to speak clearly and a bit slowly and to limit > the use of slang in order to accommodate the needs of all > listeners." > > The draft reuses the text. That text could be rewritten as: > > English is the de facto language of the IETF, but it is not the > native language of many IETF participants. Native English > participants attempt to accommodate the needs of other > participants by communicating clearly. That does seem better, but don't all parties have an obligation to attempt to communicate clearly? Scott K