From: Mark Davis (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jul 06 2005 - 13:36:35 CDT
Both committees work together to reach consensus on the repertoire and
architecture of new characters to be incorporated. Neither committee
rubber-stamps the other; that completely mischaracterizes the working
relationship between the two committees.
----- Original Message -----
To: "Bob Hallissy" <Bob_Hallissy@sil.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 10:46
Subject: Re: Arabic encoding model (alas, static!)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Hallissy" <Bob_Hallissy@sil.org>
> > > Is this decision process transparent and documented?
> > See http://www.unicode.org/consortium/utc.html.
> Well, what are you saying? There is no written documented rationale (this
is not a minor point!) and these decisions are only debated at the UTC?
> What about written documented traces of past decisions from the ISO
corresponding commitee? Is this ISO committee just a rubberstamping
organisation once the UTC has met?
> Ashraf Sadek
> St Elias Coptic Community
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 13:38:15 CDT