A few items.
- (ii) is not a requirement for voting.
- Support of the Unicode Standard is already a requirement for membership in
the by-laws.
- Oracle could probably make a case for their name for UTF8 simply being an
anachronism. After all, the original definition of UTF-8 did convert
surrogate pairs as they are doing in what they call UTF8.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: <Peter_Constable@sil.org>
To: <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 07:05
Subject: Re: UTF8 vs AL32UTF8
>
> >This is totally unacceptable from user's stand point. You are
> >effectively saying that you can call an encoding any name if you
> >describe it in your manual.
>
> [snip]
>
> >UTF-8S is not UTF-8. Stop calling it UTF8.
>
> The Unicode Consortium has rules about participation in UTC decisions:
> voting privileges are contingent upon (i) being a full member, and (ii)
> regular participation in UTC meetings. Maybe there should be a third: a
> company can't do things that clearly undermine the Standard in their
> products.
>
>
>
> - Peter
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Peter Constable
>
> Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
> 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
> Tel: +1 972 708 7485
> E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 00:17:18 EDT