RE: General policy

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>]

> Ohta-san concludes a message by saying:
> 
> I think '"full 10646" in the MIME context' should be discussed in 
> 822ext ML.
> 
> ----
> I disagree.

I don't think you can disagree.

> Putting this material on that mailing list interrupts a lot
> of other useful work and forces a lot of people who are neither interested
> nor competent to wade through it.  That is impolite, unmanageable, and 
> outside the charter of the WG with which 822ext was associated.

According to its charter, 822ext is responsible for the extention it
proposed. If the discussion of the extension of 822 can not be continued
in 822ext, or people in 822ext does not have enough knowledge or
interest on the extension, the proposed extension should be removed
from the current standard. PERIOD.

>    --John Klensin
>      (as Area Director)

May I interprete your comment that IESG is now considering to remove
"charset" specification from MIME because 822ext proposed things they
can't discuss.

Or do you think "charset" is so holy that discussion on it is forbidden
by IESG?

Anyway, I also think the discussion on how badly MIME support character sets
is uninteresting, boring and unproductive.

I can't see any reason why you raise the issue here. For this ML, MIME
is minor issue. '"full 10646" in the MIME context' is much more minor.

It's you who raised the issue and I think what you are trying to do impolite,
unmanageable and outside the purpose of the mailing list.

So, I'll be happy if you discontinue this pointless discussion.

> This is a mangement issue, not an issue of policy or theory, and has nothing
> to do with the outcome.

Could you be more productive to concentrate on policy or theory?

						Masataka Ohta