Re: British or American spelling in IETF docs

I was happily ignoring this thread, until this statement below...

On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 at 04:08, Watson Ladd <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> We should table this proposal :-P
>

'Tabling a proposal' to an Australian, and I believe to an English
person, means to put it on the table, or agenda, for discussion. To an
American, it means deferring the discussion.

So I expect you to talk about it, and talk about it now, but the
Americans expect you won't.

This difference in idiom is more the issue than largely trivial
differences in spelling. People should write with enough clarity that
these differences in communication are able to either be clarified in
the text, or understood when relevant to IETF technical specification.

And please don't get me started on the meaning and usage of 'revert'.


Narelle


> On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 11:17 PM Thomas Howe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps we need an RFC defining the English Spelling Negotiation Protocol (ESNP).
> >
> > Implementations MUST support American English, SHOULD support British English, and MAY support Oxford English. Authors using “-ize” and “-ise” in the same document MUST be prepared for interoperability failures.
> >
> > In the absence of successful negotiation, the default shall be whatever the RFC Editor changes it to.
> >
> > IANA considerations: please create a registry for honour/honor, colour/color, and programme/program. :-)

-- 


Narelle
[email protected]