WS22 (was: Unicode 5.0 decompositions of Balinese vowel signs with tedung)

From: Rick McGowan (
Date: Fri Apr 14 2006 - 19:03:09 CST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Unicode 5.0 decompositions of Balinese vowel signs with tedung"

    > Philippe Verdy wrote on Friday, April 14, 2006 at 8:42 PM
    > > The Viet-Thai, Newari, North-Arabic, South-Arabic, Old Hungarian,
    > Aramaic and Uighur scripts should also merit more attention (with
    > more formal proposals).

    Ah, thanks to Richard W for digesting Philippe's post. I missed that
    tidbit. For status and info on all of those scripts, see the SEI web pages
    at UCB. There is ongoing work, or preliminary work, on some of them. And
    SEI is now accepting funds to be used for even more work on more scripts.
    See especially

    > Of course, there is already one Aramaic block lurking under the
    > name of Hebrew. What we need on the West Semitic 22-character
    > scripts is cool and civilised discussion of which stages need
    > to be encoded separately. Charging in with isolated proposals
    > is a recipe for rehashes of the Phoenician row.

    Yes, fine. Please have that discussion. It belongs on either the "hebrew"
    list under the moderatorship of John Cowan, or a new list for the purpose.
    It doesn't belong here. I can't imagine that it would remain a cool and
    civilized discussion, and I'm pretty sure it would be moderated right off
    this list.

    > Setting up a specific list might work,
    > but it could just as easily be a flop like the Seasia list.

    New lists for special purposes are usually flops unless they result
    directly from spill-over of "too much traffic" from another list. That is
    why I continually resist spinning off new lists for special purposes.

    > I'd suggest making it a public review issue

    Things don't work that way. Someone needs to make a proposal and duke it
    out elsewhere, then submit the consensus proposal to UTC.

    > ... to wait until Phoenician is fully approved, deadlocked or rejected.

    It *was* approved and *is* final and *is* in Unicode 5.0. It's at "stage
    6" in the pipeline. Ken Whistler or someone might know more detailed status
    of the JTC1 ballot.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 14 2006 - 19:04:41 CST