Mark,
No need to be defensive.
Tengwar and Cirth are in there because *I* put them there *long ago*, and the argument made was the nature of Tolkien’s work and study of it. That remains valid for keeping there, for one day the Tolkien Estate may revise its view on the matter.
Maybe a version of the Roadmap had Klingon in it. I don’t recall. I’d’ve been the one to have put it there. There are records. It doesn’t matter, though. When lack of use made Klingon made UTC remove it from consideration, it would have been removed.
The Roadmaps are really of no consequence. They’re useful, but they have no status and are subject to any kind of change before ballotting ends.
Michael
> On 16 Nov 2016, at 01:22, Mark E. Shoulson <mark_at_kli.org> wrote:
>
> On 11/15/2016 07:47 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
>> A body of a particular kind of scholarship surrounds Tolkien’s oeuvre. That’s probably the reason.
>>
>> Michael Everson
>
> Ah. So it *is* a matter of "some literature is better than others." I repeat here all the stuff I said in my response to Asmus' letter. Since when did Unicode get in the business of deciding whose literature was important and whose wasn't? And what do they base their decisions on? How much Klingon correspondence and conversation did the UTC sift through in order to reach its learned conclusion that Klingon-speakers don't do anything "scholarly"?
>
> Do you guys even hear how ridiculously bigoted this all sounds?
>
> ~mark
>
Received on Tue Nov 15 2016 - 19:29:29 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Nov 15 2016 - 19:29:29 CST