RE: canIPA

From: John (Eljay) Love-Jensen (
Date: Wed Mar 24 2010 - 08:28:07 CST

  • Next message: Charlie Ruland ☘: "Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: canIPA worth being encoded?"

    Hi Doug and everyone,

    > "Proposal" implies that someone has written a formal proposal, intended for submission. Isn't that a bit premature?

    I think in this context, "proposal" carried the weaker semantic of "inquiry initiating a discussion which may ultimately result in a formal proposal".

    After looking at canIPA, I like what I see there as having potential. And his discussion of IPA and its history, versus canIPA was interesting to me.

    > I agree with Karl: so far the new letters look like one man's invention, yet to be adopted by anyone else.

    I agree with Doug and Karl.

    My 2 cents, as I understand it. Since Unicode is (nominally?) reactively driven by real world usage and legacy compatibility, rather than trying to be an agent of change*, it would be a bit premature to incorporate canIPA into Unicode at this time.


    * Having a unified encoding itself facilitates global communication and interoperability. And global communication and interoperability themselves are an agent of change in their own right. That's a plenty big enough charter itself!

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 24 2010 - 08:30:36 CST