Re: Relationship between Unicode and 10646

From: John Cowan (
Date: Tue Nov 30 2004 - 13:53:14 CST

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Relationship between Unicode and 10646"

    Peter Kirk scripsit:

    > >There are a number of people, yourself included, who are actively,
    > >either maliciously or from ignorance, misrepresenting the relationship
    > >between the UTC and WG2, and of the standardization process, under the
    > >guise of "innocent" discussion. ...
    > I have merely been asking searching questions, partly from ignorance I
    > agree. If you or anyone else considers that I have been misrepresenting
    > the relationship, you are free to correct me.

    Your main misunderstanding seems to be your belief that WG2 is a
    democratic body; that is, that it makes decisions by majority vote.
    Decisions are made by explicitly reached consensus, and ballots are an
    instrument of reaching consensus. Every "no" vote must be accompanied
    by comments such that, if they were accepted, the "no" vote would be
    changed to "yes". ("Yes" votes can have comments too.) The result of a
    "no" vote is that the process loops until all such votes are resolved.
    Although the UTC does not have a vote as such, being a liaison member,
    its input is treated as if it were vote comments.

    If consensus cannot be reached, the proposal is eventually dropped, I suppose.

    Time alone is real                      John Cowan <>
      the rest imaginary          
    like a quaternion       --phma

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 13:55:50 CST