From: John Hudson (tiro@tiro.com)
Date: Wed Dec 24 2003 - 16:07:46 EST
At 12:38 PM 12/24/2003, Curtis Clark wrote:
>I've been following these threads with interest, as an uninformed
>bystander. Michael's unwillingness to unify in haste seems correct in
>first principles, independent of his expertise and experience. But you
>have presented the first cogent (to me :-) argument for why delaying the
>decision is a problem.
Possibly, although it isn't necessarily the job of a proposer to decide in
which Unicode range a particular character or set of characters belongs.
Extra-alphabetic characters such as marks, punctuation or symbols may be
used by multiple scripts, so they don't necessarily belong with a
particular script, either one that is already encoded or one that is on the
roadmap. What is important for proposers to do is to document how
characters are used, including use in multiple scripts or possible variants
of potentially unified scripts. You don't need to be certain about where
things will end up in order to begin the proposal process: you just have to
document the uncertainty.
John Hudson
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Vancouver, BC tiro@tiro.com
What was venerated as style was nothing more than
an imperfection or flaw that revealed the guilty hand.
- Orhan Pamuk, _My name is red_
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 24 2003 - 16:31:27 EST