Ok. What is left is the issue around inclusive language and the
copyright issue. Both need to be taken seriously. I will address the
inclusive language and one other issue in this message. See a follow-up
on the copyright issue.
On the use of the word "Native", because MULPI makes use of this
language, and because there is a note as to why the term is used, I
think it's okay in this instance, and would request no additional changes.
That said, I do note two issues I would like the authors to address at
this time:
* the 3.1 links are broken in the references.
* at least some 4.0 docs (MULPI in particular) have since issued, and
they should be reviewed prior to this document's publication. It's
not like CableLabs publishes a new version every day, and presumably
they would appreciate us using their latest, absent good cause.
I will return to the copyright issue in a separate message.
Eliot
--
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
