From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Tue Dec 23 2003 - 05:06:02 EST
At 21:36 -0800 2003-12-22, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Maybe not as far as whether it will actually be encoded. We do know
>that "Accordance with the Roadmap" is often the sole justification
>for the code positions specified in proposals, as discussed in a
>thread some months ago.
Excuse me? Are you irritated about something, Doug?
When I fill out the proposal summary form, I do NOT bother to rehash
all the reasons why we decided to put something on the BMP or the
SMP. Why? Because it isn't a good use of our time to rehash all of
these things and pour out the history of why we thought it would be
good to put something where. "Accordance with the Roadmap" is often
the sole justification that I bother to put in the Proposal Summary
form. But it reflects consensus about where the Roadmap Committee
thinks things ought to go. You may remember that Ken convinced me to
move Phoenician to the SMP at one stage in favour of Arabic
Extensions. I suppose that's in the archives somewhere, where some
future Historian of Unicode (hi there!) can find it.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 23 2003 - 05:54:11 EST