Re: Dublin Conference: Re: ISO/IEC 10646 versus Unicode

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Tue Jul 23 2002 - 13:18:34 EDT

At 16:13 +0100 2002-07-23, Marion Gunn wrote:
>I do not understand John Cowan's anger, and I do not take personally his
>accusation of racial discrimination

Well, you should. Because they were, however much you want to pretend
that they were not. Basically you said "It was wrong to have so many
foreigners speaking at an event in Ireland and it is your fault that
you overlooked Irish speakers", and that is a racist statement. There
were lots of Irish participants and speakers in the conference. If
there should have been more, it is the fault of the Irish for not
having written paper proposals and submitted them. It was open to
everyone and well-advertised.

Twice now you have used the same rhetorical device: attack and
insult, and then claim that you were not attacking and insulting.
People have noticed. It is a rhetorical device you might choose to
avoid in future.

>I do not feel at all comfortable continuing with this discussion, and
>would prefer to have my questions about Unicode (its staffing levels)

I suspect that the Unicode Consortium will agree that this is none of
your business.

>and WG 2 (its timetable for 10646) answered, as more appropriate to this list.

The "timetable" for WG2 meetings can be found on the WG2 website.
There is only one agenda item on that timetable, which is to continue
to develop the standard. The chief work which needs to be done with
regard to the character set can be found in the Roadmaps and in the
paper which I read at the Dublin Unicode conference,

Michael Everson *** Everson Typography ***

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 11:22:45 EDT