[vip] URGENT Re: [arabic-vip] Note LC deadline for draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3536bis (was: Suggested meta-questions to think about)

[Baher Esmat]

Just adding 'URGENT' to the subject line.


On 6/29/11 1:56 AM, "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
> 
> I'm replying to myself in order to change the subject: line, which I
> foolishly failed to do before.  But given the deadline for last call
> comments (on Thursday), I thought it important to raise this issue to
> as high a prominence as possible.
> 
> Best,
> 
> A
> 
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:26:25PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> Dear Dr Hussain, colleagues,
>> 
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 05:48:16AM -0700, Dr.Sarmad Hussain wrote:
>>> I am not sure if the following message sent by Andrew got the traction it
>>> needed.  I would request the members of the Arabic script team to look at
>>> the document urgently, especially Section 7 (and the definition of variants
>>> in Section 7.2) and comment, as the document is in the last call.  There are
>>> a few categories of variants in Arabic script which are missing from the
>>> suggested list in Section 7.2 (ref. my earlier mail on variants in Arabic).
>> 
>> Thanks very much.  Let me also urge again team members to look at that
>> document, especially section 7.  Feedback can be sent to the IETF
>> apps-discuss at ietf.org WG mailing list.  You need to be a member of the
>> list to post; but if you don't want to join, feel free to send your
>> notes to me, with an explicit request to forward them to the relevant
>> IETF list as part of the last call, and I'll forward your remarks.
>> 
>> For those not familiar with the IETF, note that in the IETF, people
>> normally post as themselves and not as a representative of any
>> constituency, organization, or company.  In addition, even quite
>> informal remarks are welcome.  But comments that are received after
>> publication are impossible to address: a "quick fix" to an RFC, once
>> published, is mostly impossible except for errata.  The RFC series is
>> archival, and so once something is published a new RFC needs to be
>> written to take its place (if an update is needed).  So get those
>> comments in soon, if they're coming.
>> 
>> The last call for this draft ends 2011-06-30.
>> 
>> A
>> 
>> -- 
>> Andrew Sullivan
>> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com