From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 27 2011 - 14:27:15 CST
David Starner <prosfilaes at gmail dot com> wrote:
>> That is the right approach to take for writing systems. That is not
>> the right approach to take for entities that have nothing to do with
>> writing systems.
> I don't know that that's true. If a user decides to use the PUA in an
> internal system, who are we to object?
I didn't have much problem with sending such a user to the PUA. My
problem was with the rest of Neil Harris's quote:
> and then invite them to come back when they
> have a large community of real-world users using their new writing
> system to exchange plain-text messages for non-artificial purposes, at
> which point they could then apply to go through the normal process for
I do not believe localizable sentences will ever be appropriate for
standardization in a plain-text character encoding, regardless of the
size of the community of users. Perhaps they would be appropriate for
standardization somewhere, but not in a character encoding.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 27 2011 - 14:29:00 CST