From: James Kass (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Dec 28 2008 - 15:38:12 CST
David Starner wrote,
>And my main point was that it's reality that proposals of character
>sets used by groups of people with money tend to go forward, whereas
>character sets without the backing of people with money tend to be
>slower. The Zhaung people are not the responsibility of the Japanese
>companies behind this proposal--the Chinese made that quite clear 60
>years ago--and if more funding is needed, it should come from people
>with responsibility for the Zhuang--that is, the People's Republic of
>China, or computer companies that are selling to the Zhuang--or
>philanthropic groups dedicated to giving money to such proposals. To
>ask "if a fraction of the resources used on promoting the encoding
>"emoji" had been used to promote Zhuang CJK characters" is silly;
>those spending the resources on emoji in general had no reason to
>spend them on Zhuang.
It's a valid observation to note that well-funded proposals
move forward faster. The concept of resources, however
is not limited to cold, hard cash.
We've seen people using their talents, abilities, and intellect
to promote or protest inclusion of what some of us consider
frivolous, ephemeral non-characters.
It can be said that *those* resources could be better employed.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:33:07 CST