Re: CORRECTION: Document Action: 'Terminology Used inInternationalization in the IETF' to Informational

[ned.freed@mrochek.com]

> When I read the document, the text that Klensin cited did not
> jump out,

Exactly. Truth be told, I was more concerned with the actual definitions being
given than with the text surrounding them.

> but now the words about normativeness seem a bit
> legalistic, given the background of the community difficulties.
> Even if Randy does diplomacy, it might be a win-win thing for
> you to have an RFC-Editor note to change that part of the text,
> as the words are not useful and they do sow some confusion.

> Suggested rewording -

> Old:
>  This document gives an overview of internationalization as it applies to
>  IETF standards work by lightly covering the many aspects of
>  internationalization and the vocabulary associated with those topics.  It
>  is not meant to be a complete description of internationalization.  The
>  definitions in this document are not normative for IETF standards;
>  however, they are useful and standards may make non-normative reference
>  to this document after it becomes an RFC.

> New:
>  This document gives an overview of internationalization as it applies to
>  IETF work in this area by lightly covering the many aspects of
>  internationalization and the vocabulary associated with those topics.  It
>  is not meant to be a complete description of internationalization.  The
>  definitions in this document are purely informative for IETF standards,
>  however, they are useful and this document should become a valuable
>  resource for the IETF after it becomes an RFC.

I would also suggest changing "the many aspects" to "many aspects", per
Randy's note.

> Or something like this.  I can see why Klensin felt this paragraph was
> skirting the border.

Agreed.

				Ned