From: Tulasi (tulasird@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Jul 22 2010 - 18:51:27 CDT
> I do not recommend haste/rush.
> Michael has uploaded the proposal at mid-night 23:39 HRS.
> What if there were other proposals submitted to Unicode on that day?
> Submitted none is great!
> If not I am afraid, it will raise questions on Unicode's professional-moral.
Based on responses as included, I assess I failed to communicate using
above few lines.
Allow me to explain.
On 15 July 2010, Unicode had moved at lightning speed to register a
proposal from an Unicode insider and registered it at 23:39 HRS.
On this date, Unicode had received proposals for same purpose form
non-insiders too -- as you know this is true because India is a nation
of over a billion populations.
So what method Unicode had used to choose to register the only
proposal from an insider?
Doesn't it sound like insiders trading :-')
In order to recognize Unicode as the discoverer of India new Rupee
sign it must be transparent displaying all proposals submitted on 15
July 2010.
If ISO approves, even if Unicode does not approve, India’s new Rupee
sign gets approved automatically.
So why did Unicode rush hastily in this way?
Will India pay Unicode anything at all?
Do you know if India wants you guys to gossip in this way in this forum?
India is World’s largest democracy by the way :-‘)
Hoping I have explained!
Any question, please feel free to ask.
Tulasi
From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:50:11 -0700
Subject: Re: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal
To: Jonathan Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
Cc: unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>, Mark Davis ☕
<mark@macchiato.com>, Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>, Doug
Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>, suzuki toshiya <mpsuzuki@hiroshima-u.ac.jp>
> there is no reason why both Unicode and
> ISO could not nor should not conduct an e-mail vote on
> Michael's proposal and be done with it.
I do not recommend haste/rush.
Michael has uploaded the proposal at mid-night 23:39 HRS.
What if there were other proposals submitted to Unicode on that day?
Submitted none is great!
If not I am afraid, it will raise questions on Unicode's professional-moral.
Tulasi
From: Jonathan Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 09:12:02 +0300
Subject: RE: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal
To: unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>
I think that this day and age, and in view of the importance and urgency of
the issue as pointed out by several, there is no reason why both Unicode and
ISO could not nor should not conduct an e-mail vote on Michael's proposal
and be done with it.
Jony
From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 07:49:39 -0700
Subject: Re: [indic] Indian Rupee symbol
To: Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
Cc: Indic Discussion List <indic@unicode.org>, Unicode Mailing List
<unicode@unicode.org>
And what time have you uploaded to http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/ ?
You did not answer!
> having had experience with the EURO SIGN
> Even in the year 2010, the euro sign (¤) doesn't work reliably.
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/de.test/browse_thread/thread/929f8f60b1f29ee8/e027e91e7ef17f62?#e027e91e7ef17f62
What you call "experience with the EURO SIGN" he calls it brain-dead :-')
Tulasi
From: Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:05:53 +0100
Subject: Re: [indic] Indian Rupee symbol
To: Indic Discussion List <indic@unicode.org>, Unicode Mailing List
<unicode@unicode.org>
On 16 Jul 2010, at 11:37, Tulasi wrote:
> Really quick! Like war time :-')
> How long it took for you to write this proposal?
An hour or so.
> And what time have you uploaded to http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/ ?
>
> Nice job!
Thank you. As I said, having had experience with the EURO SIGN, I
believe it is imperative that matters like this be handled quickly so
that implementors can get to work.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
From: Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:57:24 +0100
Subject: Re: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal
To: unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>
On 19 Jul 2010, at 21:50, Tulasi wrote:
>> there is no reason why both Unicode and ISO could not nor should not conduct an e-mail vote on Michael's proposal and be done with it.
>
> I do not recommend haste/rush.
You don't remember the encoding of the EURO SIGN, as many of us do.
> Michael has uploaded the proposal at mid-night 23:39 HRS.
What of it? I am in one time zone, and the L2 and WG2 registries are
in another.
> What if there were other proposals submitted to Unicode on that day?
For what?
> Submitted none is great!
I do not know what you mean.
> If not I am afraid, it will raise questions on Unicode's professional-moral.
What I did in writing the proposal and submitting it in a timely
fashion, and in telling some of the Indian websites about it, may help
to prevent a misuse of the existing RUPEE SIGN.
This is called "being responsive". And I did the same thing with the
HRYVNIA SIGN, and the TENGE SIGN, and I shall do so with the RUBLE
SIGN when it solifies.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 22 2010 - 19:09:55 CDT