Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050707223847.04022bc0@mail.afrac.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 22:53:57 +0200
To: Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com, ltru@ietf.org
From: r&d afrac <rd@afrac.org>
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: does the Draft gives all the guidelinesrequired
	by the Registry
In-Reply-To: <OFB6216089.F7E7904B-ON88257037.00690A9C-88257037.006E0F30@
	spe.sony.com>
References: <OFB6216089.F7E7904B-ON88257037.00690A9C-88257037.006E0F30@spe.sony.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: 
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

At 21:59 07/07/2005, Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com wrote:
>I did not initially respond to Jefsey's e-mail because some of the text
>that concerned him was not mine (and will be removed) and I did not feel
>that arguing with these points with someone who questions the validity of
>my native language would be productive.

????? could you explain that ???? thank you.

>* Any concerns Jefsey might have that I am part of Peter and Addison's
>secret kabal that wants to rule the world one language at a time are
>unfounded.

?????? You have never been considered, except because you were considered 
and I documented why you should not.
?????? Secret Kabal? I think Unicode is documented commercial consortium (I 
am a paying member of) whose members have legitimate interests. The only 
difficulty is - as documented by IAB - these commercial interests should 
seriously pay attention to common and public interest and to other types of 
traffic rather than exclusively to their own propositions. All this is 
perfectly documented in RFC 3869 (this is its main thesis according to its 
authors). The ways of this type of lack of attention are documented in RFC 
3774.

I only suggest that everyone accepts these analysis of the IETF, as normal 
part of the culture of an IETF WG, and that we can work together in a 
normal manner. I also suggest that this kind of ad hominem does not help.

>I do not propose myself as the ruler of all that is Latin
>American Spanish. Nor does Sony Pictures. I am simply entering my name and
>e-mail so that anyone who needs further information about the registration
>can contact me. I do not use my personal e-mail address for such purposes.

Once again, you are not concerned by all this. This mail and your confusion 
are only the proof that the current procedure (which not the one of the 
Draft) is inadequate. Even in misreading someone else positions, Karen 
should never have felt concerned. The best way to make sure of that is 
never to mention the name of the requested.

I submit that this give more liberty to everyone to support or to oppose.

>The people who need these tags are most often not authorities on
>individual languages. They are people who need to describe whole sets of
>languages and linguistic concepts.

Yes. This is why I say that if we have to come to qualify the requesters 
they should be authoritative or users. But I prefer anonymous proponent and 
discussion over the advisability (confusion, impacts, etc.) of the 
registration.

>  I do what I can to increase the breadth
>of my linguistic knowledge through my work at Sony Pictures, personal
>research, and my involvement on this list.

Be thanked for that.
jfc


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru