From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Oct 26 2005 - 08:51:27 CST
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 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 26 2005 - 08:54:06 CST