>Howsabout: "100% of the people in the world whose native
language is not modeled by Unicode cannot use computers in
their native language;
That statement is definitely false. Unicode is not the only
game in town, and people who wish to use computers will (and
do) devise their own solutions. I know of a number of specific
cases which disprove this statement; Tai Lue, Tai Dam, Tai Nua
and Kayah Li are but a few.
>100% of those whose language is badly modeled by Unicode
cannot fully exploit the power of computers (since the
proliferation of "Unicode-enabled" software will only partially
benefit them);
That statement is unclear in more than one way, but even with
the meaning I think is intended it is pointless and unhelpful
since it amounts to "people whose language is not adequately
supported by Unicode can't depend on Unicode to adequately
support their language." As Unicode is revised to include
support for such languages that are currently only partially
supported, software that is Unicode enabled will begin to
support those languages, and the speakers of those languages
will be able to exploit the power of computers using Unicode.
(In very many cases, they already can and do exploit the power
of computers, though probably not using Unicode.)
>100% of those literary cultures whose medium is badly modeled
by Unicode will come under intense economic pressure to think
about their languages in terms of Unicode's model (i.e. to
become semi-literate in their native languages)."
Another statement that is simply false. There are, for example,
written languages in China and in Papua New Guinea for which
writing systems are only partially or not at all (e.g. Tai Lue)
currently supported by Unicode, yet for which the respective
governments are promoting the use of those languages with the
writing systems in question. To suggest that the fact that
these are not supported in Unicode today will lead to the
demise of those languages, or even to the diminution of
literacy in those languages, is, frankly, a little naive. There
are certainly a number of social and economic pressures that
can have negative impacts on oral or written language use. In
the short term, however, the fact that Unicode doesn't fully
support a given writing system would not be a significant
source of such negative pressure. It is more likely that there
will be, in contrast, positive pressures to see Unicode revised
to include support for these languages.
Sorry, Greg, but unless your statements were not intended to be
taken seriously, and I saw nothing to suggest that was the
case, then I must simply state that I consider none of these
statements to have any merit.
Peter Constable
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT