At 11:05 -0800 2002-03-14, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:
>I think the point is being missed here (I changed the subject to tryto bring
>some focus on the subthread).
>
>John was not necessarily stating HIS opinions, he was answering the question
>of what basis people would work on if they wanted to be dismissive of
>imaginary scripts.
I was aware of that.
>The fact is that "Elvish" carries a certain connotation
So what? In fact we are talking about encoding two Fëanorian scripts,
devised by Professor Tolkien to be used for languages like Quenya and
Sindarin, spoken by a people known as the Eldar. Those scripts have
the names Tengwar and Cirth. I sure never made a proposal to encode
"Elvish" scripts.
>We could argue the scholarly value from here to eternity but the three
>points John tried to make add up to a perception that some people *will*
>feel -- it behooves the UTC to consider holding off on actions until they
>are ready to have the people leave the room who you may consider "bitter"
>for their unimaginative thoughts.... encoding these scripts may be big news
>in Middle Earth but it might prove to be the road to Mordor for us (and
>without a magic ring to destroy, either!).
What actions? UTC isn't working on the proposal. UTC isn't writing up
proposals, making the fonts, picking character properties, figuring
out the ordering, or anything else. UTC won't be asked to do anything
but say yes, when it comes along, just as you did when Osmanya popped
up out of the blue, and UTC won't be doing that until Ken Whistler is
satisfied of the technical merits of the proposal and probably not
till after I get Christopher Tolkien to give a nod just to keep
everybody from biting their nails worring about whether TENGWAR
LETTER SILME is going to get us all into trouble.
Heh.
-- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Mar 14 2002 - 14:56:40 EST