Re: Unicode 7.0 goals and ++

On 7/11/2011 11:57 AM, Ken Whistler wrote:
> On 7/10/2011 4:58 PM, Ernest van den Boogaard wrote:
>> For the long term, I suggest Unicode should aim for this:
>>
> That kind of terminological purity isn't going to occur.
...
>
> The Unicode Consortium has a glossary of terms:
>
...
>
>
> But the Unicode Standard is neither a software system nor a protocol
> stack,
> so trying to apply models appropriate to other realms probably isn't going
> to get too far.
> ...

> This much is *already* available. S

...
>> Unicode 9.0 should claim: Processes will be defined and published in
>> *UML* 2.0 (for lack of an open standard)
>> (Background: think UAX #9 Bidi written in a universal -graphic-
>> language).
>
> This, on the other hand, is not going to happen..... I don't see the
> UTC going for that at all.
>
> --Ken
>
>>
>> I might have the numbering wrong, or ever the sequence. But not the
>> main line, is it?

Essentially, as Ken points out, this is not the trajectory that one
would look forward to.

So I would think you're off about what you call the "main line".

Not so coincidentally, I fully agree with his conclusions, as well as
with the reasoning behind them.

A./
Received on Mon Jul 11 2011 - 15:43:05 CDT