From: Mark Davis (mark.edward.davis@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 09 2009 - 12:58:37 CST
On the procedural question:
This list is for general public discussion of Unicode topics by any and all
people who sign up to it. It is orthogonal to the decision-making process,
which is governed by the procedures on
http://www.unicode.org/consortium/tc-procedures.html.
In particular, as we often emphasize, none of the discussion on this list is
captured. If non-voting members want the UTC to consider particular
information on a given issue, they need to submit it via the online
reporting form: "Feedback may be submitted via the online contact form [
http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html]; be sure to indicate the issue you
are providing feedback for, and try to be as explicit as possible in your
suggestions." [conciseness is also a valued by the committee...]
For particular requests on the proposal, such as name changes,
dis/unifications, glyph feedback, and so on, Markus, as chair of the symbols
subcommittee, has requested that that initial feedback go to the
emoji4unicode mailing list, where it is being processed. The issues and
provisional resolutions for the working proposal for the UTC are being
developed are being tracked there, as he's described.
Mark
P.S. I'm glad you're being entertained :-) While there are certainly
legitimate differences of opinion on this topic, I don't know that I've
heard much *new *information in a while (as opposed to restatements of
pretty well-known positions).
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:01, Van Riper <van.riper@gmail.com> wrote:
> Might I digress briefly to ask a procedural question?
>
> Clearly, there is no consensus emerging in these discussions. As a
> fairly impartial observer, I can also state that despite the volume of
> plain text (;-)) contained in the ongoing arguments there have not
> been any really new points raised for some time now.
>
> So, how do we best proceed in such a situation?
>
> I've hesitated bringing this up because as a fairly impartial observer
> it has been rather entertaining to follow the discourse here. =)
>
> Cheers, Van
>
> P.S. For those that don't know, I used to be a member of the Technical
> Committee during my tenure at VeriSign where my focus was on security
> considerations. Since my departure from VeriSign to work on more
> mundane consumer software, I am still a strong advocate of Unicode and
> have continued to monitor this list.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 09 2009 - 13:00:13 CST