Terminology, Power, and Inclusive Language in Internet-Drafts and RFCs
draft-knodel-terminology-14
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Mallory Knodel , Niels ten Oever | ||
Last updated | 2024-02-25 (Latest revision 2023-08-24) | ||
RFC stream | (None) | ||
Intended RFC status | Informational | ||
Formats | |||
Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
Telechat date | (None) | ||
Responsible AD | (None) | ||
Send notices to | rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
There has been extensive discussion in and around the IETF community about the use of technical terminology, which could be interprereted as exclusionary. The document below is published as an artefact of the discussion because it sparked many debates and inspired several actions in the IETF community. This, however, does not say anything about whether the opinions it holds are correct or incorrect. Since the debate about technology, language, and its implications will probably never be finished, we offer this document for reference in future discussions about the topic. It is important to note that this is not standard, it does not represent IETF consensus, and should not be misconstrued as anything other than the authors’ views.
Authors
Mallory Knodel
Niels ten Oever
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)