From: Asmus Freytag (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Mar 18 2009 - 11:46:21 CST
On 3/18/2009 6:52 AM, Erkki I. Kolehmainen wrote:
> ..., I find the situation close to intolerable to the participants
> from the various National Bodies.
Nicely put, Erkki.
The average NB representative in WG2 does not have expertise (or
interest) in sorting out competing claims in unfamiliar scripts. Pushing
these disagreements to the WG2 level looks like a bit of an abuse of the
> I'd like to propose that an ad hoc be set up early in the meeting with
> the clear objective to agree on either one proposal for processing at
> the meeting or at least the way forward to come up with a processable
> proposal for the following meeting.
Unless all the parties involved are at that meeting, I wouldn't know how
this would change the outcome. If two of of the three parties are
present, you might get a selection of a "majority" proposal. In any
case, I think you are right that the outcome would need to be slated for
the following meeting.
Given the nature of the script there appears to be no defensible reason
why any this should be hurried along - especially in the absence of a
clear consensus of a wide range of experts (or ideally all of them).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 18 2009 - 11:49:58 CST