From: Luke-Jr (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Jun 05 2010 - 13:07:31 CDT
On Saturday 05 June 2010 12:59:34 pm Rick McGowan wrote:
> On 6/5/2010 10:42 AM, Doug Ewell wrote, responding to Luke-jr:
> >> "Draft" characters would be ones which are not final and can be
> >> removed or replaced in the future, if they don't in the meantime gain
> >> popularity within some reasonable timeframe.
> > There is no precedent for this in either Unicode or ISO/IEC 10646. If
> > you think it has been difficult persuading people that your characters
> > should be encoded in the existing framework, just try suggesting a
> > basic architectural change like this.
> Speaking only with my person opinion on this one poin: Doug is right.
> This won't happen. Once you have characters in real usage because a
> standard was released that contains them, even if the standard called
> them "draft", you'd have data "in the wild" that could potentially
> become non-conformant.
And the alternative is data "in the wild" that never had a chance to be
conformant because the standard makes them impossible.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 05 2010 - 13:09:01 CDT