From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Nov 08 2008 - 12:09:51 CST
Michael Everson <everson at evertype dot com> wrote:
> I believe Doug's intention was to suggest that you accept "Old
> Hungarian" as the name for the script. (Doug, please confirm or deny
I guess that's what I meant, indirectly. What I was trying to get at
was that a large amount of effort is being wasted fighting over the name
"Old Hungarian" when that effort could be used to resolve other
differences between the proposals, and get this script encoded in
Unicode, which I think is a goal shared by everyone.
I personally don't see what negative impact the name "Old Hungarian"
could possibly have on the proposed encoding. I doubt there are many
users of "Unified Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics" who actually call it by
that unwieldy name, except in a Unicode-specific context. But the
script is encoded, and usable in computer systems worldwide (except that
font coverage is a bit sparse, which will be true for OH as well), and
that should be most important.
So yes, I do suggest that Gábor and everyone else accept the name "Old
Hungarian" for Unicode purposes, even if their personal preference is to
call it something else, and not let this (frankly) petty dispute get in
the way of encoding the script. It's a great script, with interesting
features, and it's been waiting to be encoded for over 10 years now.
-- Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14 http://www.ewellic.org http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 08 2008 - 12:13:41 CST