Subject: [apps-discuss] Call for adoption of draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis as an APPSAWG document

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:51:59 -0400

Paul Hoffman and John Klensin have undertaken to update RFC 3536, which 
specified terminology for use in internationalization-related documents 
and discussions.  The editors, appsawg chairs, and Applications Area 
directors think the document needs broad review, and propose to make it 
an appsawg document.

You can find the document here:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis/

The editors will soon submit an updated version, and await a decision 
on accepting the document into appsawg before doing that.  We ask that 
anyone with a stake in internationalization review the current version 
and state any objections to making this an appsawg document by 29 April.

You may, or course, also send comments on the document at this point to 
the editors and/or the apps-discuss list.  Remember that there are 
changes queued, so you might bring up points that they're already 
planning to change/correct.

The reply-to on this message is set to the apps-discuss list 
<[email-masked]>.  Please put all responses and discussion there.

Barry, appsawg chair

---

From: "Martin J. Dürst" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:53:34 +0900

[I significantly cut down the cc list]

I have not yet read the current document (sorry, no time just now), but 
I have read RFC 3536, and I think this document should be adopted as a 
WG draft.

Regards,   Martin.

On 2011/04/21 7:51, Barry Leiba wrote:
> The editors will soon submit an updated version, and await a decision on
> accepting the document into appsawg before doing that. We ask that
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:54:28 -0700

On a related note, John and I have issued the -02 with a few fixes, including a discussion of the always-popular "variant". See <http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-hoffman-rfc3536bis-02.txt>.

--Paul Hoffman