Re: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal

From: Tulasi (tulasird@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Jul 22 2010 - 18:51:27 CDT

  • Next message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal"

    > I do not recommend haste/rush.
    > Michael has uploaded the proposal at mid-night 23:39 HRS.
    > What if there were other proposals submitted to Unicode on that day?
    > Submitted none is great!
    > If not I am afraid, it will raise questions on Unicode's professional-moral.

    Based on responses as included, I assess I failed to communicate using
    above few lines.
    Allow me to explain.

    On 15 July 2010, Unicode had moved at lightning speed to register a
    proposal from an Unicode insider and registered it at 23:39 HRS.

    On this date, Unicode had received proposals for same purpose form
    non-insiders too -- as you know this is true because India is a nation
    of over a billion populations.

    So what method Unicode had used to choose to register the only
    proposal from an insider?

    Doesn't it sound like insiders trading :-')

    In order to recognize Unicode as the discoverer of India new Rupee
    sign it must be transparent displaying all proposals submitted on 15
    July 2010.

    If ISO approves, even if Unicode does not approve, India’s new Rupee
    sign gets approved automatically.

    So why did Unicode rush hastily in this way?
    Will India pay Unicode anything at all?
    Do you know if India wants you guys to gossip in this way in this forum?
    India is World’s largest democracy by the way :-‘)

    Hoping I have explained!
    Any question, please feel free to ask.

    Tulasi

    From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
    Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:50:11 -0700
    Subject: Re: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal
    To: Jonathan Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
    Cc: unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>, Mark Davis ☕
    <mark@macchiato.com>, Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>, Doug
    Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>, suzuki toshiya <mpsuzuki@hiroshima-u.ac.jp>

    > there is no reason why both Unicode and
    > ISO could not nor should not conduct an e-mail vote on
    > Michael's proposal and be done with it.

    I do not recommend haste/rush.
    Michael has uploaded the proposal at mid-night 23:39 HRS.
    What if there were other proposals submitted to Unicode on that day?
    Submitted none is great!
    If not I am afraid, it will raise questions on Unicode's professional-moral.

    Tulasi

    From: Jonathan Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
    Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 09:12:02 +0300
    Subject: RE: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal
    To: unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>

    I think that this day and age, and in view of the importance and urgency of
    the issue as pointed out by several, there is no reason why both Unicode and
    ISO could not nor should not conduct an e-mail vote on Michael's proposal
    and be done with it.

    Jony

    From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
    Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 07:49:39 -0700
    Subject: Re: [indic] Indian Rupee symbol
    To: Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
    Cc: Indic Discussion List <indic@unicode.org>, Unicode Mailing List
    <unicode@unicode.org>

    And what time have you uploaded to http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/ ?

    You did not answer!

    > having had experience with the EURO SIGN

    > Even in the year 2010, the euro sign (¤) doesn't work reliably.
    http://groups.google.co.uk/group/de.test/browse_thread/thread/929f8f60b1f29ee8/e027e91e7ef17f62?#e027e91e7ef17f62

    What you call "experience with the EURO SIGN" he calls it brain-dead :-')

    Tulasi

    From: Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
    Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:05:53 +0100
    Subject: Re: [indic] Indian Rupee symbol
    To: Indic Discussion List <indic@unicode.org>, Unicode Mailing List
    <unicode@unicode.org>

    On 16 Jul 2010, at 11:37, Tulasi wrote:

    > Really quick! Like war time :-')
    > How long it took for you to write this proposal?

    An hour or so.

    > And what time have you uploaded to http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/ ?
    >
    > Nice job!

    Thank you. As I said, having had experience with the EURO SIGN, I
    believe it is imperative that matters like this be handled quickly so
    that implementors can get to work.

    Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

    From: Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
    Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:57:24 +0100
    Subject: Re: Indian Rupee Sign (U+20B9) proposal
    To: unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>

    On 19 Jul 2010, at 21:50, Tulasi wrote:

    >> there is no reason why both Unicode and ISO could not nor should not conduct an e-mail vote on Michael's proposal and be done with it.
    >
    > I do not recommend haste/rush.

    You don't remember the encoding of the EURO SIGN, as many of us do.

    > Michael has uploaded the proposal at mid-night 23:39 HRS.

    What of it? I am in one time zone, and the L2 and WG2 registries are
    in another.

    > What if there were other proposals submitted to Unicode on that day?

    For what?

    > Submitted none is great!

    I do not know what you mean.

    > If not I am afraid, it will raise questions on Unicode's professional-moral.

    What I did in writing the proposal and submitting it in a timely
    fashion, and in telling some of the Indian websites about it, may help
    to prevent a misuse of the existing RUPEE SIGN.

    This is called "being responsive". And I did the same thing with the
    HRYVNIA SIGN, and the TENGE SIGN, and I shall do so with the RUBLE
    SIGN when it solifies.

    Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 22 2010 - 19:09:55 CDT