Subject: Last Call: 'Labels in Subject Headers Considered Ineffective At Best' to Informational RFC

From: Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:21:17 -0800

This is an interesting proposal, however I would suggest that
the grammatical mistakes relative to the french language
and the cultural references be fixed.

Suggestions:

s/The  Ambassadeur-General du France/L'Ambassadeur de France/
s/Le Academie Francais/L'Académie Française/
s/Pate-du-Cochon-Degoutant-a-la-Facon-Horme/Fromage-qui-pue/
s/courriel/mél/     (courriel was suggested by Québec, not France, as 
far as I know)

I would also suggest the author to use a standard way to represent the 
above non US-ASCII
characters in the RFC ;-)

	- Alain.

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

---

From: Carl Malamud <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 07:00:48 -0800 (PST)

Merci bien pour votre suggestions ... JSPF (Je suis pas francais).  :))

Regards,

Carl

[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> s/Le Academie Francais/L'Acad?mie Fran?aise/
> s/courriel/m?l/     (courriel was suggested by Qu?bec, not France, as 
> far as I know)
>

---

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:04:15 -0500

> Merci bien pour votre suggestions ... JSPF (Je suis pas francais).  :))

Tiny grammatical nits in the last paragraph of section 5:

-  In summary, for senders and receivers of email, use of the
- "No-Solicit:" mechanism would be simply to understand and use.  For
-  policy makers, it would be extremely simply to specify the format and
+  In summary, for senders and receivers of email, the
+ "No-Solicit:" mechanism would be simple to understand and use.  For
+  policy makers, it would be extremely simple to specify the format and
    placement of the solicitation class keyword.  (Needless to say, the
    issue of how to define what classes of messages are subject to such a
    requirement and how to enforce it are beyond the scope of this
    discussion.)

Joe

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:14:46 -0800

Hi -

http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt says:

"Internet-Drafts must be in ASCII. No 8bit chars are currently allowed.
If you need to include codepoints, a suggestion might be to use the
unicode convention: U+XXXX, where X is a hexadecimal digit."

So, for the quotes, if retaining the accent marks is really more important
than intelligibility, "Francaise" would become "FranU+00E7aise".  I'd ask
a native speaker of French which would be preferable, but I strongly suspect
that they'd find the ASCII mis-spelling less distasteful.

Randy

> From: "Carl Malamud" <[email-masked]>
> To: "Alain Durand" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 7:00 AM
> Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Labels in Subject Headers Considered Ineffective At Best' to Informational RFC
>

---

From: Carl Malamud <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:15:50 -0800 (PST)

> that they'd find the ASCII mis-spelling less distasteful.

http://trusted.resource.org/no-solicit/ has the xml source and the
html rendition.  In the xml, I use the proper utf-8, which shows up
in full glory in the html.  For the ascii version, I concur with
Randy's opinion that it makes the most sense to sacrifice the
accents, a service that xml2rfc does very effectively.  My apologies
to French speakers (and, of course, my repeated apologies to any
citizens of Freedonia as well).

Regards,

Carl

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 04:51:47 +0100

>citizens of Freedonia as well).

A very simple solution would be to write the documents in French :-)
jfc

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 07:14:12 +0100

Carl Malamud wrote:

> my repeated apologies to any citizens of Freedonia as well

Maybe you could mention that RfC 3834 with its "[Auto]" label
is and was no problem, and it doesn't need any "solicitation
classes" to work.  But don't mention "Re:" unless you REally
plan to REvive some endless threads, it's already obvious. 

                            Bye, Frank

---

From: Carl Malamud <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 02:30:38 -0800 (PST)

> A very simple solution would be to write the documents in French :-)

That would be illegal.  ;)

Carl

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 18:38:38 +0100

>That would be illegal.  ;)

This was a joke, but you make it an issue: illegal for who?