Subject: RE: [Ltru] review of the day.

From: "Addison Phillips" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:34:04 -0700

I'm not feeding the trolls, no matter what they choose to call themselves.

Addison

Addison P. Phillips
Globalization Architect, Quest Software
Chair, W3C Internationalization Core Working Group

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of [email-masked]
> Sent: 2005?6?18? 14:24
> To: r&d afrac; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] review of the day.
> 
> > At 11:03 18/06/2005, r&d afrac wrote:
> > > At 20:21 17/06/2005, Addison Phillips wrote:
> > > Oh Mighty Co-Chairs: dare I broach the subject of a Last Call and how
> we reach that?
> >
> > Before that there must be the debate on the WG-ltru Charter!
> 
> May be should it start on [email-masked] and continue here? The response
> I did not get show you need more than a mail to be heard.
> 
> > You do not necessarily need to do that. I suggest you use the x-tags
> format x-6aaaabbb we are discussing at AFRAC.
> 
> This is a possibility. But I prefer mine, because "comment" in
> "x-fr.comment-sn" is free. Will you support it on your own Draft?
> F. Charles
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: r&d afrac <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:00:33 +0200

>I'm not feeding the trolls, no matter what they choose to call themselves.

Dear Dot-Rooters,
I told you the way you would be accepted ... QED.

Further to the technical concertation meeting you invited me on Monday, I 
wish to repeat:
1. thank you for assuming my relay for a few weeks and even participating.
2. I agree with your responsible attitude towards Addison. An authors' 
trolling does affect his documents.
3. AFRAC has no objection so far to the WG-ltru Chairs. They may play 
wisely due to circumstances and authors (see above).

I also confirm that:
- AFRAC will present a Draft if the debate over the Charter is not carried 
on, or if the results stay negative for Internet users.
- this Draft will be introduced through the WG-ltru if possible.
- http://rfc3066.org has been activated. It is a site for all.

The AFRAC positions I documented:

- IETF/AFRAC/INTLNET are involved in networking, not in 
lingustic/terminology. A language is a relation protocol within a space of 
exchanges. A langtag is a possible code for an SoE. We need to be 
consistant with ISO 11179 as an SoE can correlate with any standard.
- RFC 3066's simplicity is to be preserved and increased. Current Draft's 
is "unreadable" (we have to propose a langtag ... :-)).
- this way all the documents, works and RFCs which refer to RFC 3066/BC 47 
will be respected.
- if it does not go through we will publish a Draft/TNS on x-tags (Mr. 
Charles: we will warn every developper to support long private subtags).
- every solution is to be ISO 11179, ISO 639-1/2/3/4/5/6 and ISO 3166-1/2 
conformant..
- it will conform to ISO 15924 as per the directions given by ISO 639-4
- E.164, X.121, N.49 and INTLFILE will be supported too.
- we will support all the experimentation charters you presented. However 
we need you to proceed by the book: please document the status of your 
generic NIC project - we need to address the externet registry first. 
Gositer 0.3 should be ready as far as I am concerned (the current AFRAC 
site is built with it).
- we expect to port the INTLFILE to five hexa codes by mid-August. I still 
wait for the Chinese root elements from MINC.
- we disapprove the idea of setting-up an [email-masked] 
mailing list except if this is an experimental list, within the framework 
of an rfc3066.org Draft.

A specialised face to face meeting is called on Tuesday September 6 (or 
13th?) in Versailles over the RFC 3066 drafts, the x-tags format, their 
IPv6 access grids, the metalang metamodel, the report on the dot-root 
testing the Varsaw meeting. If you have other topics to rise, please advise 
Intlnet secretariat. Members of the WG-ltru will be welcome if.

I am not sure I am in Paris at the time of the IETF meeting and I doubt 
AFRAC will want to spend $ 500 for it. I suppose I will attend one or two 
Guest Events. We could propose a WG-ltru F2F meeting as a diner in Paris or 
Versailles if some are interested (and here in first part of August?) 
Pascal: we could do something in Luxembourg after the ccTLD Meeting?

jfc

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:16:59 -0700

Hi -

> From: "r&d afrac" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 4:00 AM
> Subject: [Ltru] QED
...
> Versailles if some are interested (and here in first part of August?)
...

This would be inappropriate.  The IESG has given clear direction
in http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/Interim-meetings.txt;
I draw your attention to the following paragraph from that statement:

| The area directors will evaluate proposed interim meetings and conference
| calls to be sure that that the location, timing, etc.  do not unfairly favor
| some subset of the potential attendees and that the proposed meeting or call
| will not unfairly bias the working group discussions.  Interim meetings
| which are proposed to eliminate the need for a working group to meet during
| a regular IETF meeting will not generally be approved nor will proposals of
| interim meetings to be held within 30 days before a regular IETF meeting.

There is still time for us to request a slot for an ltru WG session in Paris.
However, meeting would be pointless unless there were significant open
issues in our chartered deliverables or significant interest in discussing
follow-on work, in anticipation of requesting additions to our chartered
deliverables.  As a practical matter, I'd want to see a proposed agenda,
as well as a rough consensus on the ltru WG mailing list that a face-to-face
meeting was needed, before I'd be willing to start negotiating with our
area director.  Note that the hotel is holding the IETF room block only until
this week, so those who plan to attend the Paris IETF meeting should already
have made their reservations.

Randy, ltru co-chair