Re: The rules of encoding (from Re: Missing geometric shapes)

From: <>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:24:50 -0800

William, I think you have a unreasonable idea of what a standard actually is. You have already made a standard and published it - I've seen all the posts at the FCP forum. All you have to do is let people use it. If a user community is going to exchange data, they will do so, and it just plain doesn't matter if some other user community were to exchange completely different data coincidentally using the same sequence of bytes.

The problem is that you don't want a /standard/ - you already have one. You want a legitimacy for your ideas that they haven't earned, and you are trying to borrow that legitimacy from Unicode and ISO. What you don't understand is that the legitimacy you want to borrow is intimately tied in with the fact that Unicode has policies and procedures that they follow, one of which is they do not recognize scripts that haven't met the criteria for inclusion.

From: William_J_G Overington <>

> A feature of using the Private Use Area is that code point allocations are
> made by a person or entity that is not a standards organization. Also,
> Private Use Area code point assignments are not unique.

Which has not kept other PUA standards like MUFI and CSUR from successfully exchanging data. In fact, they both have successfully demonstrated usage to the point that scripts have then been allocated for public use.

> In many cases, neither of those features presents a problem for successful
> use of a Private Use Area encoding.

> However, although one can often not be concerned with the fact that the code
> point assignment is not unique, the fact that it is not made by a standards
> organization is a big problem if one is seeking to have a system that one has
> invented taken up by people and companies generally.

In other words, you want legitimacy that the idea has not earned.

> For one of my present uses of the Private Use Area I am seeking to have a
> system that I have invented taken up by people and companies generally.

Then publish the standard and let them do it. If the idea is useful, then others will adopt it; if not, they won't.

> However, I feel that there is no chance of a system that I have invented
> being taken up by people and companies generally using a Private Use Area
> encoding. Thus, I feel that I will not be able to present an encoding
> proposal document showing existing widespread usa.

This /feeling/ is specifically contradicted by the evidence of language communities adopting the MUFI and CSUR standards.

> However, if the Unicode Technical Committee and the ISO Committee were to
> agree to the principle of encoding my inventions in plane 13, not necessarily
> using the particular items or symbols that I am at present using in my
> research, yet the committees working out how to form a committee or
> subcommittee to work out what to encode, then I feel that a group project
> with lots of people contributing ideas could produce a wonderful system
> encoded into plane 13 that could be of great usefulness to many people.

If it is so wonderful and useful, there is no reason why you wouldn't be able to bring together a group of people to develop the standard in Plane 15 just as easily. If you can't do that, it's a pretty good indication that it's not as useful as you think it is.

> My present goal is to have the opportunity to write a document requesting
> that agreement in principle and for the document to be considered and
> discussed by the committees and a formal decision made.

The formal decision will be "no", because you have shown zero actual usage.

> William Overington
> 12 November 2012

-Van Anderson
Received on Mon Nov 12 2012 - 19:29:59 CST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Nov 12 2012 - 19:30:05 CST