Accessing the WG2 document register
everson at evertype.com
Wed Jun 10 14:45:20 CDT 2015
On 10 Jun 2015, at 16:48, Shervin Afshar <shervin at htpassport.com> wrote:
> From: Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa at gmail.com>
>> The ISO hasn't claimed "ownership" of your document, as you
>> mention in another mail. They merely restrict public access to it.
> This is no justification and we should not trivialize an organizational behavior which is not acceptable in this day and age of open access and collaboration.
We should also not trash the whole idea of collaboration because people at a higher level in ISO have made poor decisions which are not the fault of the relevant technical committee (SC2).
>> I agree that the ISO should have the courtesy to accord contributors special status, but such big organizations are often steeped in bureaucracy, and while bureaucracies are commonly known to seem blind to individual feelings, they are seldom outright malicious of intent, I feel...
> These seem to me as reasons why ISO is of little relevance to Unicode going forward.
The SC2/UTC relationship is important because corporate and commercial concerns are not the only concerns worth taking into account. We cooperate and collaborate, and it’s not right to pretend that only the UTC has valuable input into the UCS.
> I don't think the concern here is malicious intent; it's rather the bloated bureaucracy of such organizations which makes it virtually impossible to have that "courtesy" you are talking about for individual contributors.
The bureaucracy hasn’t changed in size. Some specific decisions were taken at a high level about document distribution and participation. Those weren’t useful for our line of work. Not at all, and none of us in SC2 or WG2 are defending those. Maybe those procedures work well for some sorts of standards; I couldn’t say. But I don’t think it damns the whole ISO process forever, either.
All the best,
More information about the Unicode