Re: Cuneiform Free Variation Selectors

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Sun Jan 18 2004 - 16:53:43 EST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Cuneiform Free Variation Selectors"

    On 18/01/2004 12:20, Michael Everson wrote:

    > I do NOT believe that this thread should be discussed on the Unicode
    > List. I am responding to it only because Dean has let loose another
    > brace of hares. Let us reign them in, and kill this thread now.
    > ...
    > Because we are not going to use a "dynamic" model to encode Cuneiform.
    > Now have DONE.

    I find this kind of attempted censorship of technical discussion highly
    distasteful, especially when conducted in such a disrespectful (!) ad
    hominem manner. Michael, it is quite clear that the "decision" to use
    the static model, which you claim has been made finally (although as I
    understand it the UTC has yet to come to a conclusion on the issue),
    does not have the full backing and confidence of the experts on
    cuneiform script (I am not one; nor, I think, are you). The implication
    is clearly that the whole issue needs to be referred back to these
    experts for further consideration. It will simply not work to impose on
    them a solution which is unacceptable to a good number of them. If there
    are good technical arguments against what Dean is proposing (and I agree
    with you at least that following the Mongolian model does not look
    promising - the distinction Dean makes in his last paragraph between
    graphical difference and semantic difference shows that the same model
    does not fit), then those arguments should be made in a proper technical

    So please take this issue back to the drawing board, and discuss it
    again on the proper list, in a proper respectful manner on both sides.
    Michael, I think you are probably right on the technical issue. But you
    need to persuade Dean of that by proper argument and not impose your
    solution on him against his will.

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 18 2004 - 17:33:04 EST