[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Document Status?
I concur with Paul. The authors and the co-chairs have been working with the
ADs to address these issues. We have several emails discussion on the
drafts. Any non-editorial changes (e.g. the bidi & unicode 3.2) was and will
be bought to the group again.
The feeling I get from these discussion is that IESG is trying its best to
make sure the document got things right, rather then finding faults with the
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Paul Hoffman / IMC" <email@example.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 2:07 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] Document Status?
> At 10:38 AM 8/30/2002 -0700, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
> >The sky is not falling, Dave.
> >A new draft that we believe meets the IESG's request for clarifications
> >has already been turned into the Internet Drafts repository but has not
> >been announced by the IETF Secretariat yet.
> Paul, it would be far more helpful to see responses to the particulars,
> rather than this sort of dismissive, handwaving condescension.
> It is absolutely fine for my concerns to be unwarranted.
> What is not fine is the continuing failure to address those concerns, with
> explanations that make clear why they are not warranted.
> Dave Crocker <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850