Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050629084425.048fb030@mail.afrac.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:04:25 +0200
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
From: r&d afrac <rd@afrac.org>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Submission: draft-ietf-ltru-registry-07
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.20.2.20050629090236.06d7fd60@localhost>
References: <OFE6340F15.8832D024-ON8825702E.00691482-8825702E.006A1D06@spe.sony.com>
	<6.0.0.20.2.20050629090236.06d7fd60@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

At 02:08 29/06/2005, Martin Duerst wrote:
>Are there any other difficult-to-understand things that might
>benefit from such documentation? We already have some documentation
>about how we got to the various length restrictions; maybe that
>could be moved to the appendix, too.

Dear Martin,
this a very sensible proposition which could spare us a lot of contention 
and wasted time. It could permit to document many points and leave them 
open for the future. I will take as an example the sensible question of ISO 
11179 which is the further compatibility with the other real world issues. 
There is an enormous difference between not alluding to it and a comment 
explaining why (for example that due to the importance and the global 
nature of the issue, a specific work of the IETF on the matter is 
necessary, and that it has been noted that ISO 639-6 will comply with ISO 
11179).

The list of these comments could result from the analysis of the Charter. 
By this WG or in response to mine (if there is a warrantied result and the 
possibility to possitively get out of this dead-end I am ready to work on 
it). Every serious point of disagreement could result into a short summary 
of the responses given on the list. It would clearly describe the options 
of the document. In such a case I would even drop my opposition to BCP 47 
since this appendix would clearly define the scope and the doctrine of the 
document, the only thing we want.
best regards
jfc
    


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru