On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 03:34:05PM -0400, John R Levine wrote:
> > IMHO, english is _the_ language of international communications,
> > and the primary goal should be to give strong guidance to countries to
> > have kids speak and write english fluently. ...
>
> Sorry, but this completely misses the point I was making. I agree that it
> makes sense for the IETF to do its work in English.
Hmm.. in my outbox it shows that my email was addressed to Lloyd as i
intended it to, commenting on his draft, which was about about communications
in the IETF, not (as i understood it)) about internationalization.
I did not not mean to comment at all about internationalization.
> But there are several billion people in the world who for various reasons do
> not speak English, or prefer to speak their own langauge to each other.
> Wouldn't it be nice if the Internet worked for them, too? That's why I want
> people who understand how their own languages work and can check the
> assumptions we make who speak English and other languages written in the
> Latin alphabet.
Sure. Realistically i have no argument against that. Personally and idealistically,
i find varieties of languages great for variety of culture, but bad for communications.
Its like having IPv1...IPv4500 and NAT'ing only works with ALGs.
Cheers
Toerless
>
> R's,
> John
>
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 12:11:19AM +0000, Lloyd Wood wrote:
> > > "Actually, I'm more interested in diversity of sconomic backgrounds, in
> > > particular, countries that aren't in the G20, and that speak languages
> > > not written in latin characters, because people's use of and
> > > experience of the Internet are quite different."
