Re: Surrogate points

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Fri Feb 04 2005 - 17:16:05 CST

  • Next message: Jon Hanna: "RE: Surrogate points"

    On 04/02/2005 19:55, Hans Aberg wrote:

    > ...
    >>>[Off the list.]
    >As you you can see, my reply was intended to be off the list, private to
    >Philippe Verdy; his mailer apparently stamps the Unicode list as recipient
    >also on mail not sent to the list, and I failed to observe it and remove it.
    >The moderator failed to observe it, as it should not have been posted.

    I have been caught by this one too. I don't know how Philippe manages to
    fix his mailer so that mails arrive with a "Cc:"
    line but are not actually copied to the list, but somehow he does. Well,
    I think he should be told in clear terms that this is a serious misuse
    of e-mail which must be stopped immediately.

    But then, Hans, I really think you should check the list of recipients
    before sending ANY e-mail.

    >So Kenneth Whistler builds his very own tower of blather, as he clearly does
    >not understand the topic at discussion and its context, and there is no
    >point in commenting on that any further. ...

    This makes about as much sense as saying that Shakespeare doesn't
    understand his own plays. Look, Hans, Ken wrote most of the Unicode
    standard, so if he doesn't understand it, no one does - certainly not you.


    >Kenneth Whistler is dead wrong as in the other attacks where he fails to
    >understand the context: The linguistic problems are so complicated, that it
    >wise for engineers to stay out of "all kinds of semantic information beyond
    >mere character encoding repertoire into the Unicode Standard". The
    >complaints I received in private email was that Unicode tries to enforce the
    >engineers conceptions of linguistics. So engineers should attempt to leave
    >as many doors as possible open for the experts at linguistics. If there is a
    >consensus among a wide range of linguists, then that could be made into a

    Ken is by the way also a linguist and an "expert at linguistics".

    >... If the
    >description I got was right, that Unicode tries to enforce that Arabic
    >numbers should not be represented in the order they are written and read,
    >but in reverse, ...

    This description is not right, although there is some variation between
    users of Arabic script.

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)
    No virus found in this outgoing message.
    Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
    Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03/02/2005

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 04 2005 - 18:22:09 CST