Re: Gaps in Brahmic scripts section of SMP

On 8/2/2011 3:26 PM, stas624-uni_at_yahoo.com wrote:
> [Mainly aimed at people who can change roadmaps]
> [I used online feedback form, but got no responce, so reposting it here.]

Your feedback was forwarded to the roadmap committee, which will consider
it in the context of other requests and suggestions regarding new and
existing
allocations. You can always discuss such issues here on the unicode general
discussion list, of course, but as Shriramana Sharma noted, the online
feedback
form is the way to get official notice of input such as this.

>
> There are 6 small gaps in 'Brahmic scripts' section of SMP, which are quite useless I think. They can be easily united to form 3 larger gaps, in which new scripts can fit.

These will be addressed. Some might be easy to "fix". Others not.

>
> Finally, swap Takri+Jenticha<--> Satavahana+2gaps to get yet another 4gaps.

Takri cannot be moved. It has already passed its final technical ballots.

>
> If you think it is premature because block sizes can change, I'd propose at least move Tirhuta as it'll be too late when it is allocated.
>
> I think those small gaps will hardly ever be filled with extensions to already encoded Brahmic scripts.

That is probably true. But keep in mind that all of the preliminary
allocations (the ones
in red and blue on the roadmap) are subject to further updating before
anything is
finally approved. It is quite common for proposed allocations for
historic Brahmi-derived
scripts to gain (or lose) columns as the proposals become more mature
and get closer
to approval. So it can be a mistake to try to engage in too much
fine-tuning of the
roadmap too early on in the process.

Also, it isn't that great a concern that a few columns here and there on
the SMP may end
up more or less permanently unallocated, as long as the overall
allocation is
reasonably compact.

--Ken
Received on Mon Aug 08 2011 - 16:10:57 CDT