Request for publication: New Version Notification for draft-faltstrom-5892bis-04

Mark Davis ☕ (sıʌɐp ʞɹɐɯ) mark at macchiato.com
Mon Mar 7 01:47:46 CET 2011


It works for me.

And I think your concern is well-founded, because it did make it seem like
everyone else was 100% behind the document, which isn't true in at least one
case.

(For the future -- in no way meant to delay publication -- I think part of
the issue might be with the term 'contributor', which seems to imply a sense
of contributing text and/or ideas which made it into the document, and some
sense that the contributor approves of the results, at least overall.
Perhaps some looser phrasing might be better, like acknowledging feedback.)

Mark

*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*


2011/3/6 Patrik Fältström <patrik at frobbit.se>

> All,
>
> I have once again changed the acknowledgement section. I have gone back to
> the discussion I have had with the IETF trust, and re-read all comments on
> this list (and off list) from various people.
>
> The final suggestion from me as an editor is the following. Reasoning for
> this is that it is very uncommon, if it has happened at all, that single
> individuals are pointed out as being in the rough part of the rough
> consensus. This mainly because it looks like if everyone else _strongly_
> supports every single word in the document. A statement I can not stand
> behind as an editor.
>
> As an editor I can only say in this section a) who has helped, and b) that
> there was rough consensus behind the document.
>
> 5.  Acknowledgements
>
>   The main contributors are (in alphabetical order) Eric Brunner-
>   Williams, Vint Cerf, Tina Dam, Martin Duerst, John Klensin, Mark
>   Davis, Pete Resnick, Markus Scherer, Andrew Sullivan, Kenneth
>   Whistler and Nicholas Williams.
>
>   Not all contributors believe the solution for the issues discussed in
>   this document is optimal.
>
> With this, I hereby ask the area director for this to be published as an
> RFC.
>
> Thanks everyone.
>
>   Patrik
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> > From: IETF I-D Submission Tool <idsubmission at ietf.org>
> > Date: 6 mars 2011 16.40.11 CET
> > To: paf at cisco.com
> > Cc: paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
> > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-faltstrom-5892bis-04
> >
> >
> > A new version of I-D, draft-faltstrom-5892bis-04.txt has been
> successfully submitted by Patrik Faltstrom and posted to the IETF
> repository.
> >
> > Filename:      draft-faltstrom-5892bis
> > Revision:      04
> > Title:                 The Unicode code points and IDNA - Unicode 6.0
> > Creation_date:         2011-03-06
> > WG ID:                 Independent Submission
> > Number_of_pages: 5
> >
> > Abstract:
> > This document specifies IETF consensus for IDNA derived character
> > properties related to the three code points, existing in Unicode 5.2,
> > that changed property values when version 6.0 was released.  The
> > consensus is that no update is needed to RFC 5892 based on the
> > changes made in Unicode 6.0.
> >
> >
> >
> > The IETF Secretariat.
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20110306/26796a60/attachment.html>


More information about the Idna-update mailing list