Sasha, Stewart,
On 3/22/22, 9:02 AM, "Alexander Vainshtein" <[email protected]>
wrote:
Stewart,
Lots of thanks for a prompt and very useful response!
Regards,
Sasha
Office: +972-39266302
Cell: +972-549266302
Email: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 2:58 PM
To: Alexander Vainshtein <[email protected]>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>; Joel Halpern
<[email protected]>; Tal Mizrahi <[email protected]>;
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Inclusive language
> On 22 Mar 2022, at 12:28, Alexander Vainshtein
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I am not a native English speaker, and my understanding of what makes the
language inclusive or non-inclusive is quite limited.
> But I have a couple of naive questions about the current draft
> (https://clicktime.symantec.com/3UgRzehrLtXbpVVoFJjwExg6H4?u=https%3A%
> 2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-addogra-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5
> 798bis-03%29%3A 1. The draft uses the word "owner" quite frequently .
> Are the authors (and the community) sure this word is not "burdened"?
The term is "address owner” and is from the original.
I don't think ownership of an address represents any inclusive language
problems or clarity problems. If you have a reference indicating otherwise
please provide a pointer.
> 2. Is the text "Note that if the IPvX address owner is available, then it
will always become the Active" proper English, i.e. is "Active" a noun so that
it can be prepended with "the"?
Looking at a couple of instances it looks like the authors have
s/Master/Active/. I don’t think Active is a noun, so I think they need to
s/Master/Active Router/
I thought about this and added this short paragraph to section 2:
The terms "Active" and "Backup" are concise terms for "Active VRRP
Router" and "Backup VRRP Router".
Note that the term "Active" can be used as a noun.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/active
If it were me I think that I would define AR == Active Router near the top
and just use that term.
Certainly the substitution of Master for Active does not work well and i
wonder the term is not going to cause a bigger issue in the global engineering
community than retaining the term Master.
So why didn't you have the same problem with "Backup" in the original RFC as it
can also be used an either an adjective or a noun. I strongly disagree with
this being a problem.
Acee
- Stewart
>
> Regards,
> Sasha
>
> Office: +972-39266302
> Cell: +972-549266302
> Email: [email protected]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtgwg <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 11:40 AM
> To: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>; Tal Mizrahi
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Inclusive language
>
> In this case, as Acee pointed out in his presentation, there seemed to be
a technically accurate alternative term that is not burdened.
>
> So unless one has good reason to believe "active' is burdened, discussing
further alternative terms seems coutner-productive.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 3/22/2022 4:02 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On 22 Mar 2022, at 06:23, Tal Mizrahi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The following sentence caught my attention in the RTGWG discussion
>>> about inclusive language in RFC5798 bis
>>> (https://clicktime.symantec.com/3L8AZoX2tj7p3qPnJsD6UeC7GS?u=https%3
>>> A
>>> %2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fmeeting%2F113%2Fmaterials%2Fslides-113-
>>> r
>>> tgwg-3-vrrp-5798bis-01%29%3A
>>>
>>> "Please don’t make alternate suggestions without detailed knowledge
>>> of both the VRRP protocol and the English Language."
>>>
>>> Ironically, this sentence is not inclusive (I am sure this was not
intentional).
>>> FWIW, I believe all opinions should be heard, regardless of whether
>>> people are fluent English speakers or not.
>>> My two cents.
>>>
>>
>> Whilst you are correct, I can see where they are coming from.
>>
>> The words were a bit harsh, but I am sure well intentioned.
>>
>> Alternative words bring their own context and it is necessary to
understand the precise explicit and implicit semantics of the suggested
replacement word. Eventually the technical community will pick an alternatives
to words such as master that we all understand with the same degree of
precision as the original terms, but until then we risk having a poorly
understood set of replacement terms with imprecise meaning, that risk the
precision of the protocol definitions. We also risk wasting hours in semantic
debate between people that have different understandings of the subtle
consequences for the protocol of their preferred replacement term.
>>
>> Perhaps in this case an alternative approach is to invent a new name say
retsam and provide it with an identical definition to master but with any human
concepts excluded or replaced by machine concepts.
>>
>> Stewart
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tal.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtgwg mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://clicktime.symantec.com/39atM6C2YZQ7feeGcqa5tBV7GS?u=https%3A
>>> % 2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frtgwg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtgwg mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://clicktime.symantec.com/39atM6C2YZQ7feeGcqa5tBV7GS?u=https%3A%
>> 2 F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frtgwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://clicktime.symantec.com/39atM6C2YZQ7feeGcqa5tBV7GS?u=https%3A%2
> F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frtgwg
>
> Notice: This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information
of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or
proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure,
reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
>
> Notice: This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information
of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or
proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure,
reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
Notice: This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information
of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential and/or
proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, disclosure,
reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately and then delete all copies, including any attachments.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
