Check this site out:
http://rfc-jp.nic.ad.jp/
I *think* it has at least a handful of RFCs translated into Japanese, but
my Japanese skills aren't great enough to know if I found the ones that are
there.
There's also http://www.rfc-editor.org/language.html, with links to
Spanish and French
At 09:33 06/12/2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Check this site out:
http://rfc-jp.nic.ad.jp/
I *think* it has at least a handful of RFCs translated into
Japanese, but my Japanese skills aren't great enough to know if I
found the ones that are there.
There's also
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Its purpose is to give the IETF control of its own IPR, which
has previously been held by 3rd parties. (That's not the
legal statement of purpose in the formal Trust Agreement.)
What we then do once we have
Francis Dupont wrote:
In your previous mail you wrote:
The text in section 9.5 appear to me to make it permanently impossible
to incorporate portions of RFC in both free or proprietary products.
I believe that is unacceptable, and that it is counter to the needs of
many in the
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
At 15:50 05/12/2005, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Simon,
You are bit behind real time. We already updated this text.
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg01837.html
Dear Brian,
Great! the three stupid points I am stubbornly interested in are
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
I *think* it has at least a handful of RFCs translated into Japanese,
but my Japanese skills aren't great enough to know if I found the ones
that are there.
There's also http://www.rfc-editor.org/language.html, with links to
Spanish and French translation
Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Its purpose is to give the IETF control of its own IPR, which
has previously been held by 3rd parties. (That's not the
legal statement of purpose in the formal Trust Agreement.)
What we
--On tirsdag, desember 06, 2005 13:07:50 +0100 Simon Josefsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd feel more comfortable if the outbounds right issue was settled,
before all IPR is signed away to some external body that, to me, it
seem unclear whether the IETF has total control over.
Remember
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Its purpose is to give the IETF control of its own IPR, which
has previously been held by 3rd parties. (That's not the
legal statement of purpose in the formal Trust
Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--On tirsdag, desember 06, 2005 13:07:50 +0100 Simon Josefsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd feel more comfortable if the outbounds right issue was settled,
before all IPR is signed away to some external body that, to me, it
seem unclear
Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Hallam-Baker, Phillip [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Its purpose is to give the IETF control of its own IPR, which has
previously been held by 3rd parties. (That's not the
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin writes...
So , IMHO, the IETF urgency is today the other way around:
incorporating into RFC standards, practices or tables authoritatively
written or thought in another language than English, or in English
using normative non-ASCII art drafts or using term in a meaning
Simon,
As I understand it, the IETF has negotiated for nominal
control of IPR vested in other organizations that was developed
through IETF activities. Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose
of the trust.
However, if that is the situation, two things are easily
apparent: 1) the
See below...
-- -Original Message-
-- From: Gray, Eric
-- Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 11:04 AM
-- To: 'Nelson, David'
-- Cc: ietf@ietf.org
-- Subject: RE: Examples of translated RFCs
--
-- David,
--
-- Never-the-less, it can happen. Normative references -
-- at least by some
David,
Never-the-less, it can happen. Normative references -
at least by some definitions of the term - can be to types
of documents than RFCs.
However, it is usually the case that papers and other
documents written in French, Russian, German, etc. are made
available in - or
--On mandag, desember 05, 2005 09:17:08 -0500 Marshall Eubanks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may have sent it in UTF-8, but arrived here as ASCII :
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
^
ASCII? -+
And your
Hello Harald;
On Dec 6, 2005, at 11:37 AM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
--On mandag, desember 05, 2005 09:17:08 -0500 Marshall Eubanks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You may have sent it in UTF-8, but arrived here as ASCII :
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
At 16:55 06/12/2005, Nelson, David wrote:
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin writes...
So , IMHO, the IETF urgency is today the other way around:
incorporating into RFC standards, practices or tables authoritatively
written or thought in another language than English, or in English
using normative
At 12:41 06/12/2005, Masataka Ohta wrote:
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
I *think* it has at least a handful of RFCs translated into Japanese,
but my Japanese skills aren't great enough to know if I found the ones
that are there.
There's also http://www.rfc-editor.org/language.html, with links
Dear Brian,
thank you for your response. It calls for remarks (in the text).
At 11:09 06/12/2005, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
At 15:50 05/12/2005, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
I don't understand the context of your question. All the announcements
about the draft Trust
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
I apologise if hurt your Japanese interest,
There is no need of apologize.
May be will you want to consider the IANA request: If you are a host,
or are aware of an RFC foreign language site, please send us e-mail with
the appropriate URLs.? This would avoid
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Even this seems to go back and forth OK. Of course, if it
doesn't, it might be hard to reconstruct...
Дов�й но пров�й !
...test it. g Seriously, nobody but me uses a pre-UTF-8 MUA.
Bye, Frank
On Dec 6, 2005, at 11:08 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Довяй но провяй !
Dont know what it means but it looks great to me...:-)
...test it. g Seriously, nobody but me uses a pre-UTF-8 MUA.
Bye, Frank
happy santa Santa Claus eve
marc
Douglas Otis wrote:
this could also mean utilizing graphical characters to create
clean lines, boxes, and borders. This could be a matter of
the character-repertoire going beyond ASCII in conjunction
with a drawing application. This approach should permit a
simple translation back into
Simon Josefsson wrote:
unacceptable to the Debian and FreeBSD community. They are
not in a legal position to grant the Trust all rights to
derivative works of the work that include portions of RFCs.
We're back at CC-BY vs. CC-BY-SA, aren't we ? If they are
unwilling to share alike they
On Dec 6, 2005, at 2:27 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Douglas Otis wrote:
this could also mean utilizing graphical characters to create
clean lines, boxes, and borders. This could be a matter of the
character-repertoire going beyond ASCII in conjunction with a
drawing application. This
Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830 dot hpcl dot titech dot ac dot jp
wrote:
On the other hand, with ISO 10646, I can't print Japanese characters
in China.
This is the same tired argument you have been advancing at least since
RFC 1815, ten years ago, and it is no more true now than it was then
Character sets are important, but there is more.
I have had bad experiences with right-to-left writing
in environments not specifically designed to handle it.
And the worst case is embedding of left-to-right expressions
inside right-to-left text (or vice versa).
האם עברית עוברת נכון ?
Y(J)S
Doug Ewell wrote:
Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830 dot hpcl dot titech dot ac dot jp wrote:
at? dot?
On the other hand, with ISO 10646, I can't print Japanese characters
in China.
since most computers sold all over the world now
come with at least one perfectly good Unicode-based font
Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830 dot hpcl dot titech dot ac dot jp
wrote:
Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830 dot hpcl dot titech dot ac dot jp
wrote:
at? dot?
I tried to obfuscate your e-mail address from bots that search the
Web-based archives. I do this to everyone. Sorry if it was
In response to the call for IAOC nominations at
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg01819.html
I was asked about the time commitment. Here's the answer:
IAOC members need to attend several hours of meetings during
each IETF week, including the Plenary and IAOC office
31 matches
Mail list logo
