Re: Encoding localizable sentences (was: RE: UTC Document Register Now Public)

From: Asmus Freytag <>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:15:04 -0700

On 4/22/2013 4:27 AM, Charlie Ruland ☘ wrote:
> * William_J_G Overington [2013/4/22]:
>> [...]
>> If the scope of Unicode becomes widened in this way, this will provide a basis upon which those people who so choose may research and develop localizable sentence technology with the knowledge that such research and development could, if successful, lead to encoding in plane 13 of the Unicode system.
> I don’t think your problem is “the scope of Unicode” but the size of
> the community that uses “localizable sentences.” The Unicode
> Consortium is prepared to encode all characters that can be shown to
> be in actual use.
> Please submit a formal proposal that can serve as a basis for further
> discussion of the topic.

I'm afraid that any proposal submitted this way would just become the
basis for a rejection "with prejudice". Independent of the lack of
technical merit of the proposal, the utter lack of support (or use) by
any established community would make such a proposal a non-starter.

In other words "can be shown to be in actual use" is an important hurdle
that this scheme, however dear to its inventor, cannot seem to pass.

The actual bar would actually be a bit higher than you state it. The use
has to be of a kind that benefits from standardization. Usually, that
means that the use is wide-spread, or failing that, that the
character(s) in question are essential elements of a script or notation
that, while themselves perhaps rare, complete a repertoire that has
sufficient established use.

Characters invented for "possible" use (as in "could become successful")
simply don't pass that hurdle, even if for example, the inventor were to
publish documents using these characters. There are honest attempts, for
example, to add new symbols to mathematical notation, which have to wait
until there's evidence that they have become accepted by the community
before they can be considered for encoding.

Mr. Overington is quite aware of what would be the inevitable outcome of
submitting an actual proposal, that's why he keeps raising this issue
with some regularity here on the open list.

Received on Mon Apr 22 2013 - 15:18:35 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 22 2013 - 15:18:36 CDT