Re: String name and Character Name

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Mon Apr 11 2005 - 22:21:43 CST

  • Next message: Jon Hanna: "RE: String name and Character Name"

    Look at it this way: The fact that everybody is saying the same
    thing -- that the name isn't going to be changed because of iron-clad
    stability policies -- should prove that it has nothing to do with
    disrespect or insult to the Tamil people, language, or script. It would
    be the same for anyone else.

    -Doug Ewell
     Fullerton, California

    John Hudson <tiro at tiro dot com> wrote:

    > But whether the name is meaningful or not, it is not going to change
    > because it cannot be changed because of stability agreements between
    > Unicode, ISO and other organisations. If it could be changed, I don't
    > think you would find any opposition to changing it -- no one *wants*
    > the standard to include incorrect and meaningless things --, but it is
    > a practical impossibility. There are other things in the Unicode
    > Standard that some of use would dearly love to see changed -- things
    > that are, in practical terms, more important than character names
    > because they affect character ordering and other implementation issues
    > --, but these are covered by the same stability agreements as the
    > names, and we have to accept that they are not going to be changed.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 11 2005 - 22:23:10 CST