Re: What can be encoded in 2011? (from Re: On the possibility of encoding webdings in Unicode)

From: William_J_G Overington (
Date: Fri Jan 28 2011 - 03:40:41 CST

  • Next message: William_J_G Overington: "Localizable sentences (from Re: On the possibility of encoding webdings in Unicode)"

    On Friday 28 January 2011, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <> wrote:
    > -On [20110128 09:13], William_J_G Overington (
    > wrote:
    > >I have made no demands at all.
    > I might have missed something, but you are constantly asking for non-PUA codepoints for your "proposal" in order to have it successfully implemented.
    > That's a demand.
    Well, no.
    In England, to ask something and to demand something are very different in meaning. I may well write to the Unicode Technical Committee to ask them to consider holding a Public review: I would not demand that they hold a Public Review. To ask is to make a request. To demand is to make a demand.
    I like to think that even those people who disagree with my ideas would regard me as having expressed them in a polite manner.
    Thus I was concerned that I was being told that I should not make demands when I had not made any demands. If people wish to disagree with my ideas or to vote against holding a Public Review then that is part of discussion, yet I feel that it is unfair to tell me off for making demands when I have not behaved in such a manner.
    > And in my opinion quite unrealistic, given the amount of time and paperwork people who are working on existing historical and current orthographies have to put in and go through to get something encoded.
    Why is whether a Public review on this topic is held, or whether some localizable sentences are encoded in plane 7, anything to do with the time and effort taken for other encoding projects? Each is a separate issue.
    > Rome was not built in a day...

    William Overington
    28 January 2011

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 28 2011 - 03:43:40 CST