From: Erkki I. Kolehmainen (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Dec 29 2008 - 00:23:09 CST
We had an ad hoc in connection to the CEN TC304 meeting in Vienna on
The draft minutes include the following:
"The discussion touches on the merits of three competing encoding
proposals for the Rovas script that are currently being discussed in SC2.
both at the level of character repertoire and on that of a suitable encoding
As result of an animated debate, Mr. Küster recommends Mr. Hosszú and Mr.
Joó to separate the two concerns and to arrive an agreement on the
repertoire of Rovas
characters in the first instance. The details of character encoding should
be discussed once
consensus on the repertoire has been established".
As the result, the participants agreed to work for a common solution.
Earlier in the day, also Mr. Szelp was involved.
I'm looking forward to seeing positive results coming out of this well
before the next WG2 meeting in Dublin.
On the issue of Zhuang Han, I don't think that the statement on the IRG and
SC2 and its WG2 is correct.
Erkki I. Kolehmainen
Tilkankatu 12 A 3, FI-00300 Helsinki, Finland
Puh. (09) 4368 2643, 0400 825 943; Tel. +358 9 4368 2643, +358 400 825 943
Lähettäjä: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
Puolesta Doug Ewell
Lähetetty: 29. joulukuuta 2008 1:53
Vastaanottaja: Unicode Mailing List
Aihe: Zhuang Han (was: Re: Emoji survey)
<vunzndi at vfemail dot net> wrote:
> The [Zhuang Han] proposal first has to go though a national approval
> process, this involves a number of department and takes several years.
> Submission is then to the IRG, approval here may well take 7 years,
> then 3 or more years to go get through WG2 and SG2.
This took me by surprise too. Is it typical for the IRG to spend 7
years to process a proposal that is being actively pursued?
I'm aware that some proposals have taken 10 or more years, such as Old
Hungarian and Egyptian hieroglyphics, but usually these are proposals
that have sat around for a significant percentage of that time, waiting
for additional information, interest, or funding. No proposal that is
well defined and actively supported should take 10 years.
-- 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 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 15:33:07 CST