draft-phillips-langtags-08, process, sp ecifications, "stability", and extensions

Peter Constable petercon at microsoft.com
Fri Jan 7 06:13:31 CET 2005


> Peter, just to clarify... In my opinion (which isn't necessarily
> worth much)

(I sincerely doubt that's the case.)

>, the procedures that were followed were perfectly
> reasonable.   Anyone can form a design team and put a document
> together, and there are no rules that bar such a design team
> from using and building on a mailing list set up for something
> else.  That may or may not be wise, but it is certainly
> permitted.  The only place this runs into a problem is if
> someone presumes that a document developed in the way this one
> was developed is equivalent to a WG product, or that it is
> entitled to the presumptions of relevancy and correctness that
> go with a WG product.

I can't speak for the authors. I was not familiar with those
distinctions when the process began, and I suspect that is true of
others on the IETF-languages list who contributed. In my mind we were
following a precident that implied not only a permitted procedure but an
entirely appropriate one. I think all of us now understand, at least in
part, that some distinctions exist that may have practical implications
on how something is received by the IETF community and processed by the

> From that point of view, it is nothing
> more or less than an individual submission (or the output of a
> self-defined design team) and the comments Dave and I have been
> making apply.

I don't think I have questioned the applicability of your comments in
this regard at any point.

Peter Constable

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list