Dear Kenneth:
I appology that my last message sound like I am suggesting to make
changes to Unicode 3.0. Actually, I just hope the *next version* of
Unicode Standard could fix it (Actually, I didn't say any versoin in my
earily mail except point out the problem is in 2.0 standard). The *next
version* could be 3.1 , 4.0 , 5.0 etc. Actaully, I really think this
issue should be addressed as an Errota of Unicode 2.0 since the Arabic
Shaping algorithm in Unicode 2.0 are very broken and misleading. It will
be nice if we could put down a note in the www.unicode.org and state
that fact. Even a message like "The text specify this algorithm is
misleading and plesae ignore untill we rewrite the text." will save me
(and other people) a lot of time. I understand that it is too late to
change Unicode 3.0. But I don't think it is too late to put down a
errota for 2.0 or post a note on the website.
In the mean time, I start to doubt the quality of other algorithms
stated in Unicode 2.0, such as Devanagari and Tamil Block
description... Any known problem ? Please tell me in front so I won't
waste my time to understand them. ( I have already read them 5 - 10
times. I don't feel the text in that two description could help anyone
implement anything meanful unless we put down well-defined glyph
reference.)
Do we have plan to change the standard review process to make it more
open ? (such as w3c style) So we won't redo this kind of simple error in
the future.
I am sorry if my wording is flaming. It is just not pleasent to follow
the *STANDARD* and spend hours of late night hacking and finally find
out the *STANDARD* I referred to is broken... :(
The above message is purly my personally opinion, which do not represent
the opinion of Netscape/AOL.
Kenneth Whistler wrote:
> Frank,
>
> I am glad you are reading the standard carefully, but (nearly)
> all of your suggestions have already been addressed in the
> rewrite of The Arabic section for the Unicode Standard, Version
> 3.0.
>
> Once again, I ask the list to refrain from attempting editorial
> corrections on the standard at this point. The text for the
> Unicode Standard, Version 3.0 is frozen and being prepared now
> for copy edit. The editorial committee cannot accomodate more
> input at this point, however well-meant.
>
> Please, everybody just take a vacation on this. You will all
> have a chance to come back after New Years, pick up your
> brand new copy of Unicode 3.0 and can *then* flood the list with
> suggestions for new corrections and revisions of the standard.
>
> --Ken Whistler (Editor)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:51 EDT