From: Philippe Verdy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jan 03 2004 - 17:40:58 EST
From: "Michael Everson" <email@example.com>
> At 22:37 +0100 2004-01-03, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> >Note that a fundamental property of character identity is its most common
> >classification as a vowel, consonnant, or semi-vowel.
> That isn't true. The letter "v" is a vowel in Cherokee, a consonant
> in Czech, and (often) a semivowel in Danish.
Stop arguing against each of my words. And READ: Is said "most common"
on purpose above. Once again you are volontarily interpreting things that I
not say just to find a way to contradict me. I feel now that you have your
own reading of the Unicode standard. But stop saying always that your
position is neutral, objective. Accept that you can have a partial position
that corresponds to your own needs and expectations of Unicode.
You have the right to think that the representative glyphs are not
representative at all. I think the opposite. You may not like these glyphs,
because you, as a typographic expert, would have designed them
differently. I really think that you are unable to accept any words that
you have not said yourself, and you accept no compromize and prefer
a systematic and, once again, dogmatic positions as THE only allowed
and omnipotent expert for all questions regarding Unicode. I have never
seen you accepting compromizes and I doubt of your negociation faculties.
I must be extremely hard to negociate with you in the UTC meetings...
Now reread what I said and you'll see that there was absolutely no intent
to confuse any one, as I was clear about my intent by using enough
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 03 2004 - 18:06:03 EST