RE: ISO 15924 draft fixes

From: Peter Constable (
Date: Thu May 20 2004 - 10:10:06 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?"

    > >For now I suggest an immediate warning in the ISO15924 web pages,
    > >explicitly stating that these published tables were in beta, and
    > >contain incoherences, which are being corrected.
    > No. This is purely cosmetic. Let us move on.

    I find this cavalier attitude a bit disconcerting. Errors in the tables
    are not purely cosmetic. An IT standard is created to support IT
    implementations, and people have been and will be referring to those
    tables to create their implementations. Each view of the data should be
    reliable, and if it is found that it was not, then that needs to be
    communicated in some way.

    IMO, it is essential that there be a place on the site for errata. I'm
    inclined to agree with Philippe: the errata notes should indicate that
    there were errors in the original tables and what the nature of those
    errors were. If IDs were misspelled or missing, those should be
    enumerated. If English or French names were misspelled, I think a
    general note is sufficient.

    > >A link should list the incoherences and the proposed changes. I have
    > >such a list and all it takes for me is a simple Excel spreadsheet,
    > >used to sort the tables and detecting differences between published
    > >tables and proposed corrections.
    > The only delta we are going to deal with is the one between the
    > plain-text documents; it is that which is going to be considered
    > authoritative

    Is that document*s* (plural)? I strongly encourage you to maintain *one*
    master source from which all others are derived.

    Peter Constable
    Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
    Microsoft Windows Division

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 20 2004 - 10:11:27 CDT