Re: Unicode Stability

From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Wed Mar 02 2005 - 11:38:55 CST

  • Next message: Jony Rosenne: "RE: Unicode Stability"

    On 02/03/2005 14:56, Peter Constable wrote:

    > ...
    >
    >>>The recently accepted proposals for Hebrew do just that, they change
    >>>
    >>>
    >the
    >
    >
    >>>meaning of existing data.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>That is true of any disunification.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >No, Michael, don't take his bait. The proposals accepted for Hebrew
    >don't change the meaning of data. The only issue is that the qamats
    >qatan can't be implemented in existing or new fonts without awkwardness. ...
    >
    >

    This is true of QAMATS QATAN, but that is only one of the changes
    recently accepted for Hebrew, and not necessarily the one which Jony had
    in mind.

    >...
    >Jony's claim is simply incorrect: meaning of existing Hebrew data is not
    >changed by the recently-accepted Hebrew proposals. ...
    >

    The accepted proposal for HOLAM HASER FOR VAV does change the meaning of
    existing data, from correctly spelled to a spelling error. It has the
    potential (although for Hebrew words rather than isolated fragments this
    is not realised in practice) of changing meaning by incorrectly
    resolving ambiguities, i.e. a form intended to represent meaning A but
    in fact ambiguous between meanings A and B could be incorrectly resolved
    to meaning B.

    I accept Michael's point that it is impossible to make a disunification
    without this danger by adding a new character - but it is possible if a
    variation sequence or similar is used. This is a very good argument for
    adding variation sequences rather than new characters for
    disunifications, for it preserves stability in the standard in the sense
    defined by Doug Ewell:

    >it does not change in a way that causes existing ... data to break.
    >
    >

    That is why Jony and I among others worked hard to find a solution to
    the Hebrew HOLAM problem without adding a new character. For example, we
    looked at solutions using variation sequences. But the one who "make[s]
    additions to Unicode all the time" strenuously opposed every solution
    which did not involve addition of a new character and forced through his
    own proposal for an addition, therefore creating the situation in which
    the meaning of existing data is changed.

    -- 
    Peter Kirk
    peter@qaya.org (personal)
    peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
    http://www.qaya.org/
    -- 
    No virus found in this outgoing message.
    Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
    Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 01/03/2005
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 02 2005 - 11:40:14 CST