From: Michael Everson (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Apr 04 2006 - 08:28:18 CST
At 11:18 -0800 2006-04-01, Doug Ewell wrote:
>>Perhaps most importantly, should I be worried that you posted this
>>on April 1? :-)
>I thought he was joking last year when he proposed INVERTED
>INTERROBANG, in a proposal form with "2005-04-01" sprinkled all over
>the place -- in bold even -- but it's been approved by UTC.
John Jenkins and I are serious, though we chose to present an
enjoyable proposal on an enjoyable day.
I believe that the proposal is sound.
* The set of characters is stable.
* There's been two PUA implementations and at least two non-UCS font
implemenations (one commercial!) available for a number of years.
* There is a growing body of literature about this script, on its own
and in comparison with other scripts, and this shows no signs of
* it is required for scholarly as well as non-scholarly use
* using in-line images (as in the Wikipedia article) is inconvenient
* using the PUA is not a good solution as the characters aren't
standardized and Google for instance ignores PUA characters
* there is plenty of space available in the SMP
* encoding is required so that users can process Phasistos characters
in a uniform and consistent manner (e.g. for web searches)
* the Phaistos Disc characters are used at least as much as most of
the 40,000+ CJK-B characters
-- Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 04 2006 - 08:52:22 CST