+1
On 5 December 2018 05:51:01 GMT+05:30, Vint Cerf
<[email protected]> wrote:
>suggestion:
>
>set up the advisory group and allow it to offer advice to the
>appropriate
>AD.
>This same advisory group can reasonably share its findings more
>generally,
>thereby "educating...." the rest of the community. No power to block
>should
>either explicitly or implicitly be inferred by the creation of the
>advisory
>body.
>
>vint
>
>
>On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 7:09 PM Ben Campbell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Responding to a couple of points, inline:
>>
>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 5:54 PM, Pete Resnick <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>
>> Trimming a bit:
>>
>> On 4 Dec 2018, at 17:37, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>
>> Howdy Pete,
>>
>>
>> Please re-read John's message, which includes this:
>>
>> "its mission was
>> to advise, inform, and perhaps even educate the community on
>> i18n issues, rather than merely advising the ART ADs and/or
>> designating people to perform reviews late in the Last Call
>> cycle. "
>>
>> As I have said multiple times, I have no problem with an AD
>requesting a
>> review of a specific individual or set of individuals. But John's
>message
>> is highlighting that this group is meant to be something different
>than the
>> usual directorate.
>>
>> Certainly to some small extent all of the directorates "advise,
>inform,
>> and perhaps even educate the community", as each is willing to do
>early
>> reviews, and some of the advisory groups (like the assorted
>"Doctors") will
>> help a WG when directly solicited by the WG. The fact that those
>duties get
>> a more formal mention in the mission of the i18n directorate doesn't
>give
>> me pause. But what I was responding to was this part of your earlier
>> message:
>>
>> On 4 Dec 2018, at 16:02, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>
>> ...I inferred that the intent was to set up a group with an
>> independent authority to foster work or block documents.
>>
>> Like Ben, I see nothing in John's words (or any of the discussions of
>the
>> directorate) that indicate any power to "block documents", let alone
>some
>> other sort of special "independent authority" (beyond what we already
>have
>> experience with). And that seems the real basis for your objection. I
>think
>> perhaps you're tilting at a windmill
>>
>>
>> As an ART AD, my expectation is that the directorates only power to
>block
>> documents would be to convince a (typically ART) AD to do so.
>>
>> That concerns me, especially if it is meant to have a
>> review power beyond "advising the ART ADs", which is what (ART)
>> directorates do. Soliciting and receiving that advice is the state
>you're
>> pointing to, and but John has asserted this is not that.
>>
>> John has asserted that it is not *only* that. But the only thing that
>it
>> appears to be beyond that is a group that can, as John said, "advise,
>> inform, and perhaps even educate the community".
>>
>> Given that
>> assertion, I think the community ought to know and have a voice in
>what it
>> is instead.
>>
>> If it had any additional authority, I would agree. It does not appear
>to,
>> and therefore I do not.
>>
>> I also am disappointed that the ART ADs did not simply ask the
>relevant
>> questions of the people that they would or will put on the
>Directorate, if
>> they are seeking the usual sort of advice. There is no power in the
>advice
>> coming from a directorate rather than Individual 1 or 2. But that is
>a
>> timing question, not a process point.
>>
>> There is no power, but often there is more organization. That seems
>like a
>> legitimate reason for the pause.
>>
>> At the risk of putting words into Alexey’s mouth, I think this was an
>> exceptional case due to the fact that the directorate creation was
>> imminent, but perhaps not so imminent that it could finish it’s first
>> review before the LC ended. It was Alexey’s choice to stop the LC,
>but he
>> might have chosen the same even if he just asked an individual to do
>an
>> expert review.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Ben.
>> _______________________________________________
>> IDNA-UPDATE mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>>
>
>
>--
>New postal address:
>Google
>1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor
>Reston, VA 20190
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>IMA mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima
--
Sent from my Android device with XGenPlus.
_______________________________________________
precis mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
