Re: Improper grounds for rejection of proposal N2677

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Wed Oct 26 2005 - 08:51:27 CST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: ISO 15924 and differences in French names of scripts"

    Andrew S <asunic at mail dot ru> wrote:

    > WG2 is competent enough to understand that its cited justification
    > (that the new hex characters would be disruptive to existing
    > implementations) is clearly false, as I explained in my previous
    > message, yet that's the justification which it chose to cite.
    > Therefore there must have been some other reason which it didn't cite;
    > otherwise, it would have approved the proposal. It seemed to me that
    > the arguments which you mentioned were probably the actual reason for
    > rejecting the proposal, yet WG2 didn't cite those arguments; if they
    > were indeed the reason, then WG2 should have said so.
    > The fact that WG2 knowingly cited a false justification is the reason
    > why I said that the grounds were improper.
    > If the grounds for that rejection were proper, then it would also be
    > proper for WG2 to reject any arbitrary proposal on the grounds that
    > the moon is made of cheese.

    It's still not clear to me whether you are actually arguing in favor of
    the hex characters, arguing against the inclusion of the mathematical
    letters (it's far, far too late for that), or arguing that WG2 used
    inappropriate and inconsistent criteria for rejecting the former and
    approving the latter.

    Doug Ewell
    Fullerton, California

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 26 2005 - 08:54:06 CST