On Fri, 1 Jun 2018, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Require that documents have I18N Considerations sections, require review
by an I18N directorate, and you'll see how quickly participants who used
to not give a damn about I18 will come around, learn what they have to,
and get their I18N work done. Suddenly the I18N directorate will be in
demand.
This is worth considering...
I don't think it's a very good idea. It'll just lead to useless pro-forma
language. It'd be OK if IESG review were to flag drafts and ask whether
they should say something about I18N.
Like jck, I have to disagree with Nico's assertion that anyone can pick up
I18N expertise quickly, and also jck's comment that if your experience is
only with European alphabetic languages, you've barely scratched the
surface. It's remarkably subtle. It needs a particular mindset, in much
the way that being a crypto expert does. Different mindset, though.
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@xxxxxxxxx, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
