From: Dean Snyder (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jul 06 2005 - 22:20:06 CDT
Kenneth Whistler wrote at 12:23 PM on Wednesday, July 6, 2005:
>> >> I think it would be interesting to know what decisions ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC2
>> >> and its Working Group 2 have taken that went against recommendations of
>> >> the UTC
>> To help form judgments based on data, not assertions.
>Judgments about what?
Judgments about the issue at hand - just read the recent emails in this
thread and you will know what we are talking about.
>And to what end?
Why should you care? What are you hiding?
But to answer your question - it is primarily the facts of the matter
that are interesting in supporting a judgment whether or not the ISO
10646 WG2 is basically a rubber stamp of UTC, and not your bald
assertions, or anyone else's, to the contrary.
>> >> - can you, or others, name some of the more significant ones?
>> Please list for us here some of the most significant decisions ISO/IEC/
>> JTC1/SC2 and its Working Group 2 have taken that went against
>> recommendations of the UTC.
>I'll cite one obvious example: Arabic Presentation Forms-A, U+FB50..U+FDFB.
>Those were added to 10646 by WG2 against the recommendations of the UTC.
>> In addition, since 1992, let's say, give us your best estimate as to the
>> percentage of decisions ISO has made that went against UTC
>> recommendations compared to all the decisions ISO made.
>I don't see how such an estimate could be helpful -- it wouldn't
>reflect the history or purpose of the decision-making regarding
>ISO/IEC 10646 in any meaningful way.
If the numbers are so meaningless then why are you so assiduously
avoiding giving them?
Methinks thou dost protest too much.
>Nor is it clear what metric
>you could use for "counting" decisions.
>But if you insist: it is certainly greater than 1% and certainly
>less than 99%, +/- 50%.
Your non-answers are merely stonewalling stemming from your reactionary
position and not from your ignorance of these matters. You, of all
people, have excellent educated estimates as to what the numbers are,
but you are unwilling to divulge them because you are afraid they will
at least appear to support the judgement that WG2 is, by and large, a
rubber stamp of UTC.
I also note here the almost deafening silence of others here who could
address this issue.
Dean A. Snyder
Assistant Research Scholar
Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project
Computer Science Department
Whiting School of Engineering
218C New Engineering Building
3400 North Charles Street
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218
office: 410 516-6850
cell: 717 817-4897
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 07 2005 - 11:29:42 CDT