From: Otto Stolz (Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de)
Date: Mon Apr 18 2005 - 02:30:39 CST
Hello Peter Kirk,
on 2005-04-13, I had written:
> It would, however, be more useful to the general public, if you would
> communicate your knowledge through the official channels, so your
> suggestions would end in the places where users of the Unicode standard
> would expect (and hence read) them, viz. in the annotations for
> individual characters (TUS, chapter 16), in the description of the
> individual scripts (TUS, chapters 7 through 15), or in the Unicode
> Character Database, as appropriate.
Again, you have quoted only part of this, like so:
> I had written:
>> It would, however, be more useful to the general public, if you would
>> communicate your
>> knowledge through the official channels, ...
(Here you have clipped the crucial part of my contribution,
which renders my next sentence, quoted below, just ridiculous.)
> Quoting only part of the above, you have written:
>> But I thought Ken had just told us that error reports on character
>> names made through these channels would be ignored.
> I was explicitely talking about the things that *can* be changed, viz.
> the annotations for individual characters (TUS, chapter 16), the
> description of the individual scripts (TUS, chapters 7 through 15),
> and the Unicode Character Database. ...
And again, you conclude from your partial quote:
> No, the context was very explicitly Unicode Character Names and any
> "actual error, or inaccuracy" found in such names, as was clear from the
> subject line and from the paragraph just before the one I quoted.
And you fail completely to see that the paragraph you twice have
quoted maimedly is meant to divert the context in the proper
direction (I'll quote again in the hope that you will read it
> so your suggestions would end in the places where users of the
> Unicode standard would expect (and hence read) them, viz. in
> the annotations for individual characters (TUS, chapter 16),
> in the description of the individual scripts (TUS, chapters 7
> through 15), or in the Unicode Character Database, as appropriate.
> This thread is about Unicode Character Names. I am well aware of
Apparently, not all of the contributors were. So I felt like having
to point them in the right direction.
You have continued:
> The problem is that most software offering to users a
> choice of characters, e.g. from a character map, does not display
> annotations fully.
This may indeed be a problem, but I was not aware of this when
I wrote the above, as the software I am using does not display
those Unicode Character Names, but rather localised names (which
are not always accurate, either, but I deem this a problem
of Microsoft, and not a problem of Unicode).
I think, other contributors in this thread have already suggested
viable solutions to that problem, so I won't try to outdo them.
My point was, and still is: Send your substantiated suggestions
for better descriptions of the various characters (in both the
annotations in chapter 16, the description of the individual
scripts (chapters 7 through 15), and the Unicode Character
Database) to <http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html>. TUS is the
ultimate reference for all applications of Unicode, so all
corrections must go there.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 18 2005 - 02:31:28 CST