language tag structure

Randy Presuhn randy_presuhn at mindspring.com
Tue Jan 18 03:29:50 CET 2005


Hi -

> From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey at jefsey.com>
> To: "Doug Ewell" <dewell at adelphia.net>; <ietf-languages at alvestrand.no>
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 3:52 PM
> Subject: Re: language tag structure
...
> This "ietf-language at alvestrand.no" mailing list has made a complex private
> Internet standard process "BCP" Draft.

Private?  In what sense?  The mailing lists and discussions have certainly
open and publicized.  Otherwise I, as an outsider to this work, would not
have found out about it long ago.

> It does not address all language
> related tagging needs.

Nor should it.  "Perfect is the enemy of done."

> I therefore prepare a document for information one
> the way we will have addressed them all, once they have stabilized and been
> demonstrated. I will also engage a BCP 025 process for a WG-Tags to be
> created in order to address the information tagging needs in a consistent way.

But please please please don't allow this research project to hold up completion
of 3066bis.

> The purpose of my mail was to make sure no one saw a problem with the parts
> which wants to address the needs discussed on this list.

The responses make it clear that several participants do have problems
with the proposals in your message.  Unfortunately, you don't seem to have
addressed the objections.  I've seen no messages in support of those proposals.

>  I have no reason
> to suppose the responses I received were not loyal and genuine. They have
> discussed parts for being outside of the scope of their draft what was not
> the question. They have not discussed parts in their own scope.
...

This is normal engineering discipline.  It goes with the "E" in IETF.
It is necessary to avoid "creeping featurism".  The lack of support
for investigating your areas of concern suggests that if a tags working
group were to be formed, its charter would constrain it to a much narrower
set of issues than you would like.  If you cannot build a concensus that a
real problem exists AND is worth fixing AND can be solved AND belongs
in the IETF, folks won't waste time here solving it.

Randy




More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list