Re: CLDR and ICU

On 7/26/2012 1:21 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> I thought the Unicode Consortium had a formal policy of forbidding
> untrue (or "misleading") claims of conformance to Unicode standards.

No. What would be the point? Voluntary standards organizations have
no mechanism for policing compliance.

Sure, one can always complain and call out someone who makes a conformance
claim about a product or algorithm or whatever... which is wrong or
misleading.
But that kind of social pressure (and any possible impact it might have on
marketing) is about the best anybody can do.

I doubt even ISO is really any different. I could manufacture plastic
chewtoys for
dogs and claim that they were fully conformant to the ISO 1920-7:2004
standard for non-destructive testing of concrete. Who is going to stop me?
I'm not going to worry about ISO coming after me
on some account of a "formal policy" about misleading claims of
conformance.

Governments, on the other hand, are different. They can pass laws and
enforce them. Or create accreditation agencies and compliance and
licensing mechanisms. So if you want to get Congress to pass a law
making it illegal to make untrue or misleading claims of conformance
to the Unicode Standard (or UCA or whatever), feel free. ... ;-)

--Ken
Received on Thu Jul 26 2012 - 16:36:36 CDT