RE: Overloading Unicode

From: Erkki I. Kolehmainen (
Date: Mon Jun 07 2010 - 05:38:57 CDT

  • Next message: William_J_G Overington: "RE: Overloading Unicode"

    The Public Reviews are organized for relevant items, for which there is a great deal of expressed interest. In my opinion and recollection, your proposal doesn't qualify for this.


    Erkki I. Kolehmainen

    -----Original Message-----
    From: [] On Behalf Of William_J_G Overington
    Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 11:49 AM
    To:; Mark E. Shoulson
    Subject: Re: Overloading Unicode

    On Saturday 5 June 2010, Mark E. Shoulson <> wrote:
    > It isn't and should not be the Unicode Consortium's job to sort
    > through incoming ideas and decide which ones are nifty enough to
    > encode.
    > Unicode isn't here to make your dreams come true. It's here to encode
    > what's there and to enable people to do what they've already been
    > doing, not what you think it would be cool if they did.
    Well, in between the items you mention, there is the possibility of encoding what is becoming there as a result of a Public Review and research and development activity by whoever chooses to participate and enabling people to do in a standardized way what they are finding during the Public Review and research and development process that they can do.
    I am hoping to submit a document to the Unicode Technical Committee in the hope that the Unicode Technical Committee will institute a Public Review.
    I feel that the possibility of the Unicode Technical Committee instituting such a Public Review would be increased if there were support for such a Public Review to take place.
    I feel that a Public Review conducted by the Unicode Technical Committee would be a good way to decide whether to encode a portable interpretable object code into Unicode.
    William Overington
    7 June 2010

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 07 2010 - 05:43:03 CDT