[Rt4-whois] SSAC recommendations regarding terminology

[Smith, Bill]

I support adopting the suggestions re clearly defining data, protocol, etc.

On Sep 27, 2011, at 10:27 PM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:

> Dear Tema Members,
> 
> whiole waiting for my flight back home to Europe on Friday, I had the
> opportunity to consciously read the various documents, already having
> the considerations of the F2F meeting in my (almost empty :-) ) head.
> 
> After doing so, I am wondering what the position of the team is wer the
> recommendations of the SSAC, specifically to think about adopting their
> proposals for terminology.
> 
> I think adopting the basic suggestions to clearly specify registration
> data, protocol stuff and directory service/display for the end-user
> does make a lot of sense.
> 
> I am less convinced that the more detailed and specific terminology
> suggestions and acronyms would really benefit the readers of our final
> report.
> 
> Does anyone have a particular pov or guidance?
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilfried.
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois