On November 16, 2021 at 5:00:16 PM, Acee Lindem wrote: [A little detour from Mike's topic.]
> ...but I didn't see it in the Knodel draft. Hopefully, this terminology is > acceptable. The terminology list (which is where the Knodel draft was being discussed) "expressed strong support for the sentiment that the guidance on inclusive language in [NISTIR8366] is suitable for the IETF as well..." [Quoting from [1].] IOW, look at the NIST document, not the draft. Alvaro. [1] https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/on-inclusive-language/ [NISTIR8366] https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8366 _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
