From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jul 19 2010 - 03:01:31 CDT
On 19 Jul 2010, at 06:21, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> ¦b Jul 18, 2010 4:32 PM ®É¡A Doug Ewell ¼g¨ì¡G
>> Michael Everson <everson at evertype dot com> wrote:
>>> So you're saying they'd be better off just putting it at U+20B9? :-)
>> No, I'm saying that if they really need a solution this instant, they'd be better off adhering to the Unicode Standard and 10646, and putting it in the PUA rather than (1) overloading U+0060, (2) overloading U+20A8, or (3) putting it at U+20B9 before that code point is formally assigned.
> In this instance, as was done for the Euro, I would advocate option (3) from the earliest possible moment.
I quite agree. This is why I have, at least, forwarded links to my proposal to a few of the Indian forums. And why I hope that the UTC in August will accept this code position and assignment. I have, of course, written to the representatives of the GoI to let them know that the proposal has been made, but as usually happens, unfortunately, I have not had a response from them.
I very much hope that the UTC doesn't decide that they have to wait for them to get Government approval to endorse the proposal. The bureaucracy in India is large and not very speedy. (We didn't worry about the Ukraine or Kazakhstan when we encoded the currency symbols they had invented.)
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 19 2010 - 03:03:43 CDT