Re: Suggestion for new dingbats/symbols

In terms of setting up a research project you are on your own. Unicode deals with issues only once they are clearly on the path for encoding as characters. That is usually the case when the items in question have seen traditional research (often academic) to a sufficient degree that they can be said to be "understood" or even "well understood".

This is not the case here, and so what you would be engaging in is this kind of basic research that aims to understand the fundamental nature of the subject.

If you like to carry this out as an open source project then you would have to source your own place to host it, with all the available technology that go along with this. I think it would be a fascinating project that should be of interest to its own community of enthusiasts and subject experts (probably turning quite a few of the former into the latter by the time it's done).

Good luck.

A./

-----Original Message-----
>From: Neil Harris <neil_at_tonal.clara.co.uk>
>Sent: May 31, 2013 1:23 PM
>To: "Asmus Freytag (w)" <asmusf_at_ix.netcom.com>
>Cc: “unicode“ Discussion <unicode_at_unicode.org>, "Dreiheller,Albrecht" <albrecht.dreiheller_at_siemens.com>
>Subject: Re: Suggestion for new dingbats/symbols
>
>On 31/05/13 20:37, Asmus Freytag (w) wrote:
>> I think that research that does precisely this kind of task of correlating symbol repertoires against each other is extremely valuable in its own right.
>>
>> Additional research that documents the usage of these symbols -- in computing environments -- would also be useful.
>>
>> Reliable facts on users and the tasks in which they use particular symbols (represented in filed and data) would be a better basis to argue about possible encodings than just the existence of symbols or whether they are highly recognizable when seen on signage.
>>
>> Having said that, documenting the details of ongoing efforts at understanding symbols by posting each small finding on this list is probably inappropriate. That kind of effort belongs in a research project aimed at symbols.
>>
>> A./
>>
>
>Thanks! I agree that a mailing list is a very poor venue for this -- I
>just wanted to demonstrate that the repertoire of public information
>symbols was quite coherent, and very amenable to unification, instead of
>being a random grab-bag of pictograms with no defined boundaries -- and
>then I got carried away.
>
>ISO has its TC 145 committee to talk about exactly this, and no doubt
>they will have a lot of this sewn up already, but it's not really a
>public forum, and their documents are not freely available.
>
>Is there an alternative forum that could be used to develop something in
>a crowdsourced, collaborative way that could later be refined to
>generate a more formal document such as a Unicode encoding proposal?
>Something as simple as a wiki would work fine in the short term...
>
>Neil
>
>
>
Received on Fri May 31 2013 - 15:57:42 CDT