Marion Gunn wrote,
> It would not require the whole consortium to get involved in the
> minutiae of what David describes below (a couple of boys in a backroom
> could do it) via a sort of Tucows site set up, giving Unicode-friendly
> ratings, or even broad compliance with MES/BMP/whatever, with no
> guarantee of performance, beyond what David has indicated.
> Sounds like a real time-saver, or is that a real-time saver?:-)
It sounds like Hobson's choice.
But, I'll agree that it's a time saver.
We can also agree that the whole consortia needn't involve itself
in this kind of minutiae.
Indeed, since this kind of Unicode certification is beyond the realm
of TUC, the consortia needn't involve itself at all. The couple of boys
in the back room could do it, and possibly figure out a way to do it
On the other hand, if a certification program could represent
revenue for TUC*, revenue which could be used to further the
"cause", then who better to judge Unicode compliance?
* ...such as use of the logo in the certificate notice...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marion Gunn" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 3:21 AM
Subject: Re: Unicode certification - was RE: Dublin Conference/Standard Disclaimer
Arsa James Kass wrote:
> Any series of books which begins with the complete destruction
> of Earth is bound to be amusing, eh?
> Best regards,
> James Kass.
Book 4 deals more with the creation of a new/alternative earth, James!
In any case, as this is way off-topic, might I bring it back, via my
earlier suggestion, as elaborated on by David Possin (below).
It's perfectly acceptable for Unicode to confine itself to providing
tables as touchpoints for those (its consortium members and others)
actually making builds implementing principles set out in its publication.
It would not require the whole consortium to get involved in the
minutiae of what David describes below (a couple of boys in a backroom
could do it) via a sort of Tucows site set up, giving Unicode-friendly
ratings, or even broad compliance with MES/BMP/whatever, with no
guarantee of performance, beyond what David has indicated.
Sounds like a real time-saver, or is that a real-time saver?:-)
David Possin wrote:
> It would be intereting and helpful to be able to find out if a product
> is Unicode-compliant before purchasing it. There are various test
> institutions out there that perform that work for other standards. I
> don't think it would be Unicode.org's responsibility to provide for the
> certification, to avoid membership issues, maybe it should create the
> certification requirements, though.
> I find myself wasting a lot of time figuring out if a third-party
> product or a certain version can handle Unicode and/or up to which
> version it is compliant to. I would like to be able to see a little
> Unicode logo on a box stamped with a release number, making it the
> manufacturer's responsibility to prove it. It works for operating
> system releases and other stuff, why not here as well?
> Dave Possin
> Globalization Consultant
-- Marion Gunn * E G T (Estab.1991) vox: +353-1-2839396 * firstname.lastname@example.org 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Contae Átha Cliath; Éire
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Jul 25 2002 - 05:27:27 EDT