Re: Updated Phoenician proposal: confidential?

From: James Kass (
Date: Sun May 30 2004 - 03:39:18 CDT

  • Next message: Ernest Cline: "RE: Interesting Timing"

    Peter Kirk wrote,

    > I will take the opportunity of reminding Mike Ksar that the original
    > proposal N2746,,
    > contained factual errors, in particular the statement in C 2a that no
    > contact has been made with members of the user community. In fact there
    > had been considerable contact before the proposal was made, as well as
    > afterwards, with scholarly users of Phoenician script, as documented in
    > part in the archives of the Unicode list, but these users have been
    > almost unanimously opposed to the proposal. I trust that this error has
    > been corrected in the revised version of the proposal. If it has not,
    > that should in itself be sufficient grounds for rejection of the
    > proposal on the grounds that the proposer is attempting to deceive the
    > committee.

    No-one can attack your credibility if you haven't any.

    Michael Everson's credibility is well-established, in my book, and I can't
    even conceive of a motive for him to try to deceive the committee.

    Michael Everson had responded earlier in these threads as to the
    reason behind the answer to the user community contact question
    in the proposal form. Also, the proposal itself did contain more
    than the single word "no" in that same field.

    Others, fortunately, have already addressed concerns about the
    confidentiality issue.

    As for the speculation that "these users have been almost unanimously
    opposed to the proposal", I consider the remark inaccurate yet find
    myself unable to attack your credibility in this regard.

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun May 30 2004 - 03:40:57 CDT