Re: A proposed change of name for Latin Small Letter TH with Strikethrough

From: Ernest Cline (
Date: Sat Mar 06 2004 - 14:10:48 EST

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Interchange requirement, was: A proposed change of name ..."

    > [Original Message]
    > From: Peter Kirk <>
    > I don't think my words justify the point you are trying to make with
    > them. My hypothetical other dictionary would have its own community
    > of users, largely distinct from the communities of users of the
    > dictionaries using the ligatures under discussion.

    By that level of argument, one could argue for the inclusion of the Klingon
    script in Unicode. The problem is not that the character in question is not
    found in printed matter that people make use of, but that like the Klingon
    script, derivative works are not written using the proposed character.

    If an example of such a derivative work can be cited, that would
    constitute sufficient evidence of a user community that I would
    withdraw my objections.

    > >
    > >That argument not only convinced me against the unification
    > >I proposed, it convinces me that this character truly belongs as
    > >a private use character. It has no well defined semantics.
    > >(H.6 Point 8) and no evidence that it is widespread. (H.6 Point 14).
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > Your reasoning is flawed because you seem to assume that a character
    > to be encoded must meet ALL of the criteria in the list in Annex H.6. But
    > the text does not state that; rather this is a list of "Some criteria
    > that strengthen the case for encoding".

    No not at all, but I do expect that it will not actively contradict those
    It was easier to express my case in terms of how it contradicted
    H.6 that in how it met H.7 For example, the lack of widespread use
    could also be expressed by the final statement in H.7 "criteria that
    weaken", i.e.: "there is not enough evidence for its usage or its user
    community" but that is not assigned a bulleted point in the annex.

    That the character is used is not in question, but not even to the
    same extent that the Klingon script is used. No evidence that
    derivative works using this character has been presented.
    The only likely derivative works that I would expect to even
    possibly use such a character would be a book about dictionaries,
    and even there, I would find it far more likely that such presentation
    would be graphical (i.e., a picture of a portion of the dictionary
    showing the use of that character) than something that would be
    used in the text itself.

    > Anyway, the character "has well defined user community / usage", the
    > users of the dictionary in question. It is not clear that "user" implies
    > those who write the character, or only those who read it. Many
    > historical characters have been accepted for Unicode which are not
    > regularly written, except in copying old texts, but are still regularly
    > read.

    > The character also has well-defined semantics, indeed they are
    > explicitly defined in the dictionary. The only generally applicable test
    > which the character fails is that of being widespread; but it is
    > actually much more widespread than some characters recently (and
    > correctly) accepted for Unicode. But characters are not expected to meet
    > all these criteria.

    But without referring to that definition within that dictionary, a reader,
    even a reader who is well versed in dictionary usages would not
    know what the proposed character means in that text. That is why
    I said it does not have well defined semantics.

    As for being widespread, the way to judge that in my opinion is not
    in absolute terms, but in relative terms. I.e., within the intended
    community of use, does the character see widespread use.
    Within the community of dictionary publishers this is not a
    widespread character. Nor is it within the community of dictionary
    readers. I don't think the community of readers of a particular
    dictionary is an appropriate choice of community. By that
    criterion, the readers of the materials of The Klingon Language
    Institute constitute a appropriate choice of community.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 06 2004 - 14:38:42 EST