[Unicode]   Common Locale Data Repository : Bug Tracking Home | Site Map | Search
 
Modify

CLDR Ticket #11446(closed: out-of-scope)

Opened 2 months ago

Last modified 4 weeks ago

Correcting the name and position of U+262C currently labeled as ADI SHAKTI but, is Sikh religion's symbol 'Khanda'

Reported by: jimidar@… Owned by: anybody
Component: unknown Data Locale: pa
Phase: dsub Review:
Weeks: Data Xpath: https://www.unicode.org/Public/1.1-Update/UnicodeData-1.1.5.txt
Xref:

Description

Hi there,
I have been working on Punjabi language for more than half of a decade. While looking for Sikh religion's symbol 'Khanda' I came across Unicode U+262C named 'ADI SHAKTI', which is incorrect in its entirety. I don't know who proposed this name before it was accepted in Unicode version 1.1 stated as:

'Unicode 1.1 Composite Name List, including default properties # Revision of July 5, 1995 (1.1.5)'

with details:

262C;ADI SHAKTI;So;0;ON;;;;;N;;;;;

But problem with this name is that 'ADI SHAKTI' is not even known to native speakers of Punjabi language and Sikh people at all. The symbol in question is commonly known as 'KHANDA' or ਖੰਡਾ (in Gurmukhi script) in Punjabi people as well as Sikh religion. Even the wikipedia page for religious and political symbols corrects the mistake by adding the correct name 'Khanda' to the description of the symbol in miscellaneous symbol block. see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_political_symbols_in_Unicode#Miscellaneous_Symbols_block

Now with this inappropriate positioning of the symbol in miscellaneous block resulted in two undesired outcomes.

1). It did not get the recognition and its position in Gurmukhi table (https://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0A00.pdf), it rightfully deserved.
2). It was left out of almost all of the tech giants like Microsoft, Google, and Apple etc. in their Gurmukhi keyboards designed around Unicode.

These two outcomes resulted in a catch 22 situation of further ignorance about this widely popular and well know symbol in Sikh religion and Punjabi people otherwise.

I hereby propose:

1). Changing the name from 'ADI SHAKTI' to 'Khanda'

2). The correct placement of the symbol in Gurmukhi table (within the range: 0A00–0A7F) preferably near/next to the symbol 'EK ONKAR' (U+0A74).

Thanks for your consideration in advance.

With warm regards,

Attachments

Change History

comment:1 Changed 2 months ago by b.kandola@…

I totally agree with this amendment as the name is Khanda and not Adi Shakti.This should be urgently reviewed and corrected.

comment:2 Changed 7 weeks ago by roozbeh

This is unrelated to CLDR, and should be handled by UTC. (It has been submitted to UTC feedback, and has already been discussed in the script ad hoc in its last meeting.)

comment:3 follow-up: ↓ 4 Changed 7 weeks ago by doug@…

I would be shocked if UTC approved renaming or moving an encoded character, no matter how misleading the name or how unexpected the code point.

comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 3 ; follow-up: ↓ 5 Changed 6 weeks ago by jimidar@…

Replying to doug@…:

I would be shocked if UTC approved renaming or moving an encoded character, no matter how misleading the name or how unexpected the code point.

So it will be okay for them to keep misleading a whole religion and keep misidentifying their symbols? I thought UTC was unbiased and prompt to own their mistakes, but you are telling me another story here.

comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 6 weeks ago by doug@…

Replying to jimidar@…:

Replying to doug@…:

I would be shocked if UTC approved renaming or moving an encoded character, no matter how misleading the name or how unexpected the code point.

So it will be okay for them to keep misleading a whole religion and keep misidentifying their symbols? I thought UTC was unbiased and prompt to own their mistakes, but you are telling me another story here.

The “nameslist” file in Unicode, which feeds the code charts, includes an informative annotation:

262C    ADI SHAKTI
        = khanda

For Unicode 12.0 (2019) they have added another annotation:

        * Sikh religious symbol

So they have both recognized that the symbol has a more appropriate name, and identified its proper usage.

But moving a character to a different code point is not about showing sensitivity to a religion or culture, or about showing lack of bias; it's about destroying interoperability. Existing data and applications that use the existing code point would suddenly become invalid. (Well, not suddenly; it would actually take many years for fonts, keyboards, and usage to migrate to the new code point, and some never would.) That is a basic violation of stability, and would adversely affect the user community much more than leaving it where it is.

And there are applications that depend on character names being stable as well.

In any case, CLDR is not the correct venue to request a change to Unicode character encoding. Better would be a proposal to UTC. Or just join the public mailing list and post this as a question, and see what people think.

comment:6 Changed 6 weeks ago by doug@…

Roozbeh pointed out above (sorry) that it has already been submitted for UTC consideration.

comment:7 Changed 4 weeks ago by mark

  • Milestone changed from UNSCH to to-assess

comment:8 Changed 4 weeks ago by mark

  • Status changed from new to closed
  • Resolution set to out-of-scope

Out of scope for CLDR.

View

Add a comment

Modify Ticket

Action
as closed
Next status will be 'new'
Next status will be 'closed'
Author


E-mail address and user name can be saved in the Preferences.

 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.