Subject: [Ltru] Versailles meeting

From: r&d afrac <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:04:01 +0200

FYI, the face to face meeting in Versailles I announced in my June 
22nd, 2005 mail has been hold today. I had also invited those of the 
WG-ltru wanting to attend (copy of my mail after Addison's "troll" 
welcome to Dr. Charles). It was also attended by some conference 
calls. Here is the central part of the report. This meeting only 
represents its participants not their organisations.

<quote of the report>

1. examination of the impossibility of a generalised end to end 
interoperability in using WG-ltru proposed langtags due to necessary 
information not being conveyed from author to reader (referent, 
context, date of the registry version).

2. consideration of the now publicly known competition of major 
stakeholders' groups over a de facto exclusive on "langtag" 
management. The different motivations (printing industry global 
problems, OS area control, IANA control, racial/cultural profiling, 
shaping the world, etc.) have been discussed. General agreement is 
that only a user-centric open architecture Multilingual Internet can 
address this situation and prevent the Internet balkanisation the 
"internationalisation", and its resulting commercial confusion, leads back to.

3. analysis of the Draft authors' and Peter Constable's "langtag" 
concept. The conclusion was that unfortunately:

     - this vision is foreign to networking.
     - this vision is foreign to multilingualism and not even fully 
"internationalised".
     - there is little hope of an improvement in a near future since 
the number of contributors is extremely low and none of the really 
concerned stakeholders (non-koine mother tongue literary and cultural 
academics, artists, searcher, authors, trainers, etc.. related 
industries and consumers from every country) is involved or informed.

4. commendation of JFC Morfin, for his WG-ltru endeavor to obtain a 
far clearer Draft than in December and for publicly exposing the 
commercial interests behind the Draft, and of those who contributed 
in gaining the interest or support of Governments, organisations or 
coporations.

5. consensus to proceed according to June 22nd's agreement (JFC's mail):

- the prepared langroot file should be put online. It should 
progressively document the five elements currently analysed as needed 
by end to end interoperability and brain to brain 
interintelligibility: language, mode, community, referent and context.

- to pursue the effort of the participants towards an independent 
entity assuming an open registration service until it may become a 
IANA open process. AFRAC will temporarily assume project leadership 
(JFCM abstained on this very last point)

- to develop the registry management and necessary presentation tools.

- to organise a http://langroot.org access engine based upon the langroot and
   - to support its specialised replication for ISO 11179 compliant projects
   - to use it together with the AFRAC experimentation as a part of 
the common DRS (distributed registry system) R&D work.

- to maintain a documentation of that effort via the IETF, and other 
SDOs and international entities, informational Drafts and documents 
(rough consensus: two participants opposing that IETF is neither 
multicultural nor competent in multilateral areas).

- to support the equal lingual opportunity declaration proposed by 
the NICSO (http://nicso.org/equilang.pdf)

- to help the missing technical competence and R&D in networking 
language issues, in participating (in spite of scarce resources) into 
the various standardisation processes, but in trying to discourage 
"culturally civic" reactions. Agreement is the need is for education, 
not for grouped activism.

</quote>

jfc

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru