Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Progress

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:54:56 -0800

Martin Duerst <duerst at it dot aoyama dot ac dot jp> wrote:

> I think an artificial date is good, but I'd prefer to have one that 
> look more artificial, e.g. 2099-01-01 or so (e.g. 2029-09-09 to 
> address a point mentioned by John Cowan). Otherwise, some people might 
> think that we plan to finish this work at the start of 2008, which 
> would be terriby misleading.

If nobody has any objections, I'll use 2029-09-09 in future drafts.

I certainly hope we can finish by the start of 2008.  The level of 
activity since I wrote the original "Progress" post 11 days ago has not 
been encouraging.  There have been discussions about a variety of 
topics, but the only one I've seen that is related to moving 4646bis 
forward was from Mark, who said he still has outstanding issues with the 
draft and would send a list -- but I haven't seen the list yet.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages 

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

---

From: Marion Gunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:47:43 +0000

Thanks, Doug. That is progress.
mg

On 19 Feb 2007, at 21:54, scríobh  Doug Ewell:

> If nobody has any objections, I'll use 2029-09-09 in future drafts....

- -
Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
* [email-masked] * [email-masked] *