Re: On stability policies

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Thu May 25 2006 - 13:31:49 CDT

  • Next message: Andrew Lipscomb: "Re: On stability policies"

    On 5/24/2006 7:43 PM, J Andrew Lipscomb wrote:
    > There's a difference. Unicode itself has stability policies (the
    > wisdom of which I state no opinion on, but that ship has sailed). The
    > CLDR, a more recent import into the Unicode Consortium's operations,
    > is another matter, and does not have stability policies.
    The difference is that the Unicode Standard is about the representation
    of textual data. Once encoded, the interpretation of such data must
    remain stable - otherwise we will be cut off from our history.

    CLDR is about cataloging conventions. Conventions are living constructs
    and subject to change. If it is deemed useful at some point to
    explicitly preserve 'historical' conventions, a mechanism could be
    invented in CLDR to preserve previous, but now outdated conventions. In
    such a case, I would not be surprised to see guarantees preventing the
    change of such 'frozen' conventions.

    However, that's not the current model for the CLDR.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 25 2006 - 13:43:06 CDT