From: Richard Wordingham (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jul 06 2005 - 12:55:42 CDT
Peter Constable wrote:
> On Behalf
>> Of email@example.com
>> Could I then see the documented and minuted rationale for using a
> static (non-
>> productive) Arabic character encoding model? What were the issues and
> risks the
>> WG2 looked at before making its decision not to encode combining
> arabic three dots,
>> two dots, etc.? Or did it just follow what the UTC had decided for it?
> I'm sure it did not follow UTC, since you're asking about a decision
> that I believe would have been taken back around 1989 or so before WG2
> and UTC were interacting.
In his postings on the 3rd
(http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2005-m07/0042.html) and 4th
Hallissy referred to a more recent proposal for a 'generative encoding'. I
think this is what Ashraf is asking about.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 13:01:40 CDT