Re: Relationship between Unicode and 10646

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Sat Nov 27 2004 - 21:54:02 CST

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Ligatures"

    At 01:26 PM 11/27/2004, Philippe Verdy wrote:
    >But it's true that the United States have delegated several times their
    >official international representation to the Unicode Concertium, acting on
    >behalf of the US government for some decisions or some limited domains
    >(this is valid because Unicode is incorporated in US, a necessary
    >condition to represent the US government in international organizations);
    >this is a private contractual arrangement between Unicode and the official
    >US representant, but this does not change the rights of Unicode at ISO.

    This, of course, is about as accurate as your spelling of the word
    Consortium. In other words, entirely fictitious. Now, if there was a
    'Concertium', which I wouldn't know, never having heard of a body with that
    spelling, perhaps that body did do many of the things you claim, but the
    'Consortium' never did.

    As a US domiciled organization, the Unicode Consortium is one of many
    members of the relevant working group of the US Standardization
    organization INCITS. I know this firsthand, because I am one of the
    delegates. Other members in that working group include other US domiciled
    organizations such as IBM, Microsoft, Apple, Sybase, AOL etc.

    I find myself in a similar situation to Mark Davis: I don't have the time
    to respond to every piece of misinformation that's been thrown out on this


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 27 2004 - 21:54:42 CST