Subject: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-04 expires next Thursday.

From: Bill Woodcock <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 03:17:40 +0100

I note that the excellent draft-knodel-terminology-04 is currently set to expire this upcoming Thursday.

The draft has my full support, and I hope we can move forward with it, whether individually or by merging with draft-gondwana-effective-terminology, and/or draft-moore-exclusionary-language.

Where are we at on all that?  Anything I can do to be helpful?

                                -Bill

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 15:29:29 -0600

On 20 Feb 2021, at 20:17, Bill Woodcock wrote:

> The draft has my full support, and I hope we can move forward with it, 
> whether individually or by merging with 
> draft-gondwana-effective-terminology, and/or 
> draft-moore-exclusionary-language.
>

Hi Bill,

As per the summary of the two virtual interim meetings that took place 
post-IETF-108 (see 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/6Od2aX-uiYGdYCKZqfvrOHHtY58), 
it was the rough consensus of GENDISPATCH that a "quick-spin" WG be 
formed to take on these issues and that draft-gondwana (rather than 
draft-knodel) would be a reasonable starting point for that WG's work. A 
draft charter started floating around last week, and we expect work to 
take place there if the WG is chartered. I'm sure the AD and the 
proponents of the WG would appreciate your comments on the proposed 
charter (see 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/Zm8vtslsgMO-PbIEujvtZodVJBg). 
Until the official WG Review announcement goes out, it appears that this 
list is being used for discussion of the charter.

In my opinion, if the WG gets chartered, it is almost certain that some 
of the ideas in draft-knodel will be merged into the WG's document(s).

Cheers,

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best