Re: Provenance of Unicode

From: Dean A. Snyder (
Date: Wed May 02 2001 - 17:38:54 EDT

on 4/30/01 3:46 PM, Kenneth Whistler at wrote:

> the discussion list does not develop protocols

I'm embarassed to ask this, but that's never stopped me before. ;-)

What do you mean by "protocols" when you say that this list is not involved
in developing them?

Do you not, for example, consider the canonical ordering of combining marks
and the bi-directional algorithm protocols? [Actually, I've always thought
that one of the great benefits of Unicode was the value added by the various
"protocols" (or "properties" and "rules" in Unicode parlance) it develops on
top of ISO 10646.]

So, where is the line drawn regarding what this list (and by extension, the
UTC?) will not involve itself when it comes to building on top of simple
tables of code points?


Dean A. Snyder
Senior Information Technology Specialist, Humanities
Research and Instructional Technologies, 167 Krieger Hall
School of Arts and Sciences, 426A Gilman Hall
The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA 21218
410-516-6021 office
410-961-8943 mobile
410-516-5508 fax email

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 00:18:16 EDT