On 4/1/2016 4:20 AM, Janusz S. "Bień"
wrote:
Both an index and the descriptions can coexist.
Personally I think the index should be the primary source. The problem
is to find or to desing an appropriate software which would allow to use
the available manpower (probably provided by volunteers) in an efficient
way.
Best regards
Janusz
New documents are added on a schedule that is different from the
release schedule for the Standard. Also, documents may cover
characters that are on some level of "proposed" for extended
periods. All these are additional reasons why the editorial
committee or the UTC (which themselves consist of volunteers) will
not get involved and should not get involved.
If you were truly interested in creating a resource like an index
over character descriptions in proposals, you would need to expect
to source your own merry gang of helpers and find a way to organize
them. The easiest way to motivate people is when the result is
useful to them. That's why I keep coming back with my suggestion for
a focused effort.
You could think of it as a pilot project. Rather than tackling all
possible characters you would focus on some subset that shares some
commonality, perhaps Latin extensions. You would have to solve many
of the problems that Ken elaborated, but if they have an (at least)
acceptable solution, then you would have delivered something useful,
and provided a model on which others can build research into other
repertoires.
I'll step out of this discussion now, because as much as I would
have wanted access to an index like you describe for another project
I am involved in, I don't have time or good ideas to contribute at
this moment.
A./
Received on Fri Apr 01 2016 - 09:56:05 CDT