Re: Aramaic unification and information retrieval

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Tue Dec 23 2003 - 09:22:07 EST

  • Next message: Jim Allan: "Re: Aramaic unification and information retrieval"

    At 06:10 -0800 2003-12-23, Peter Kirk wrote:

    >If so you must have second sight, because I have not stated this
    >point before, which is that the place for Aramaic, if encoded at
    >all, is on the SMP together with other extinct scripts.

    Ah. I thought you were complaining (again) about Aramaic being on any
    Roadmap, rather than making a distinction between SMP and BMP.

    >But extinct scripts should be encoded on the SMP, according to the
    >rules in e.g. TUS 4.0 section 2.8. Gothic is an example of that. If
    >Aramaic is encoded, it should be another example.

    There are no RULES about where anything gets encoded. There are
    guidelines. nevertheless, I have no problem with Aramaic being
    encoded on the SMP. I'll move it there now. Happy Christmas. :-)

    >>>The UTC should make sure that such research has been done
    >>>properly, and not allow provisional decisions taken on the basis
    >>>of incomplete research to become standardised by default.
    >>
    >>Don't be ridiculous. Nothing gets standardized by default.
    >>
    >It was you, Michael, who wrote:
    >
    >>When I fill out the proposal summary form, I do NOT bother to
    >>rehash all the reasons why we decided to put something on the BMP
    >>or the SMP.
    >
    >That implies that you expect the UTC to accept those reasons without
    >further questioning,

    No, it doesn't, but you are not taking into account other facets of
    our process that have to do with consensus in the meetings. I can't
    fault you for that, but please don't be so literalist. ;-)

    >without even any documentation explaining the earlier decision, and
    >without checking whether, even according to that documentation,
    >"Further research is required". That was my meaning.

    The UTC doesn't allocate code positions. WG2 does. We assign things
    their places in WG2 meetings according to consensus.

    Now, go have a mince pie. I'm going to. :-) 

    -- 
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  * http://www.evertype.com

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 23 2003 - 10:17:36 EST