From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Mar 10 2010 - 07:37:55 CST
Andrew West <andrewcwest at gmail dot com> wrote:
> I think that there rightly is a high bar for getting a formal alias
> defined. There are very many character names that are not ideal or
> that some people would prefer changed to something else (tens of
> thousands if we count the term "ideograph"), but we do not want to
> create hundreds or thousands of unnecessary formal aliases. On the
> other hand there is a low bar for getting informal aliases added to
> the code charts.
I think Ken is right that if Karl's concern about the height of the bar
has to do with a specific character, and not just policy in general,
then we should be talking about that specific character. Otherwise we
are probably spinning our wheels.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 10 2010 - 07:41:46 CST