From: John Cowan (jcowan@reutershealth.com)
Date: Wed Aug 13 2003 - 16:19:59 EDT
ekeown@student.umass.edu scripsit:
> Could you possibly explain to me why these
> other organizations---IETF and W3-- are
> apparently concerned about character properties,
> to the point where apparently they also have
> a hand in deciding what will happen with
> Hebrew?
>
> For a long time, I thought that the
> "gatekeepers" were the UTC and the people
> in Tel Aviv....so there are these others?
The IETF and the W3C do not care in the least what properties are assigned
by the Unicode Consortium to any specific character, or what treatment
is given to any specific script.
They do care very much that the Unicode Consortium, having made certain
guarantees of stability (viz. that certain character properties would
not be changed), abides by those guarantees.
It's pretty well agreed by those who care that the combining classes of
Hebrew vowel signs were assigned badly. Unfortunately, nobody pointed
out the problem (or not forcibly enough) during the period 1991-1999
when something could have been done about it. It's too late to do
anything about it now without breaching those guarantees. The Unicode
Consortium's word is its bond.
-- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com I must confess that I have very little notion of what [s. 4 of the British Trade Marks Act, 1938] is intended to convey, and particularly the sentence of 253 words, as I make them, which constitutes sub-section 1. I doubt if the entire statute book could be successfully searched for a sentence of equal length which is of more fuliginous obscurity. --MacKinnon LJ, 1940
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Aug 13 2003 - 16:51:59 EDT