Re: A question about "user areas"

Date: Wed Jun 02 2010 - 09:34:11 CDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: A question about "user areas""

    From: Doug Ewell (
    Van Anderson <vanisaac at boil dot afraid dot org> wrote:
    > > Look up the Conscript Unicode Registry if you want to examine a
    > > pseudo-standardized Private Use agreement. A simple mapping table will
    > > enable you to equate your private use "standard" to the officially
    > > encoded forms of these scripts, when that time comes, if you wish to
    > > publicize - in the sense of both "enable public use" and "get the
    > > message out" - your mappings. The CSUR already has three scripts:
    > > Phaistos Disk, Deseret, and Shavian, that have migrated to the
    > > Standard, and we're waiting on Tengwar and Cirth to make the move as
    > > well; it actually seems to work quite well.

    > Coordinating the PUA code points with CSUR (and other PUA allocation
    > schemes like SIL and MUFI) would be a good idea, to reduce the risk of
    > collision. As a reminder, though, CSUR itself is for Constructed
    > Scripts, so ancient Chinese characters that are actually part of the Han
    > script probably would not belong there.

    No no no. I would not suggest anything of the sort, just that the CSUR would be a template for how a private use allocation can be used on an unofficial, but still standardized basis, and also, as you said, that avoiding overlapping the CSUR, SIL, and MUFI agreements would be smart. I agree totally that archaic Chinese characters would be inappropriate for the CSUR.

    > I'm not sure how much longer we should continue to wait for Tengwar and
    > Cirth.

    I hear Michael talking about meeting with the Tokeinists every once in a while, so I can only assume that it is proceeding in some way.

    > --
    > Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA |
    > RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ ­

    Van Anderson

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 02 2010 - 09:36:22 CDT