W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > April to June 2022

Re: agenda+ : IETF: draft-ietf-core-problem-details-07

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:43:09 +0900
Message-ID: <0d1e0d85-3493-e2f9-47c3-44cdb39ffcd7@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: John Klensin <john+w3c@jck.com>, 'Internationalization Working Group' <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Hello John, others,

On 2022-06-30 13:24, John Klensin wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Some weeks ago, I mentioned questions I had been asked about the
> work of an IETF WG, one of whose drafts seemed in danger of
> getting wrapped around a text directionality angle.
> 
> I made some comments back to them, Addison made more (and
> probably more useful comments), and, once the document came up
> for general "Last Call" review in the IETF, Martin Dürst made
> several more.

Just to clarify, during Last Call, Francesca Palombini, ART Area 
Director, requested a review from the I18N directorate, which was 
assigned and carried out by Harald Alvestrand. My additional comments 
were triggered by that review. See the thread starting at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/21YQX6ZIxjvQCHYxrNci-rDETaU/

Regards,   Martin.

> The document was revised to reflect those (not
> entirely consistent) comments or at least the author's view of
> them.  There is now what is likely to be a final window for
> speaking up, lasting through about the middle of next week.
> 
> If anyone feels like looking at the (presumably nearly final)
> document, see
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-problem-details/
> .  This is obviously not a request from a W3C group or within
> the W3C.  However, the work does affect the web and, as I
> understand it, special devices and RESTful applications and APIs
> in particular, so the efforts of anyone who felt like looking at
> it, perhaps on the theory that getting it right now would avoid
> problems later, that would be appreciated.  Comments should go
> directly to last-call@ietf.org; I see no particular advantages
> in trying to prepare a WG position.
> 
> While this should probably go on the agenda for the record, I
> don't see any need to spend more time on it than would be needed
> to summarize or point to the comments above.
> 
>       john
> 
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2022 06:43:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 June 2022 06:43:31 UTC