on 4/15/00 4:30 PM, Steven Brent at sbrent@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> Please help me - I'm new to this. I saw the following at the
> www.uncode.org/pending/ site:
>
> "Shavian has been accepted by the UTC for encoding in Unicode using
> surrogates (June 1997). It has not yet been considered by WG2."
>
> What does it mean that UTC has accepted for encoding in Unicode, but it has
> not been considered by WG2? What is the process here?
>
A proposal for encoding Shavian was sent to UTC and approved for inclusion.
It hasn't been forwarded to WG2 for decision, however. The press to get
Unicode 3.0 finished took precedence, and at this point, I think it would be
best to get to get part 2 of 10646 approved in its current state before we
start adding new scripts to it. That is, Shavian is unlikely to be
considered by WG2 before 2002.
Shavian was proposed to UTC primarily as one of a small number of scripts
for initial encoding using surrogates. We'd reached a stalemate in the
development of the standard: nobody was looking to implement surrogates
because there weren't any scripts that required them, and nobody wanted
their script to be encoded using surrogates because nobody was implementing
them. There were a number of proposals submitted to (and approved by) the
UTC in early 1997 intended to break this cycle -- scripts of genuine
interest with sufficiently small (or sufficiently academic) user communities
that nobody would object to encoding them with surrogates. Shavian was one
of these. Unlike some of the others -- Deseret, Etruscan, Gothic -- it
never got sent on to WG2 for some reason.
=====
John H. Jenkins
jenkins@apple.com
tseng@blueneptune.com
http://www.blueneptune.com/~tseng
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT