From: asadek@st-elias.com
Date: Wed Jul 06 2005 - 07:28:18 CDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erkki Kolehmainen" <erkki.kolehmainen@kotus.fi>
> The corresponding ISO committee is ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC2 and its WG2 is
> specifically dealing with the 10646. All WG2 meetings are minuted
> in great detail (thanks to Uma), and the outcomes of the ad hoc
> groups of experts that are being set up on the side as needed to
> resolve major issues are presented as WG documents to provide the
> basis for decisions by the full WG.
Excellent.
Could I then see the documented and minuted rationale for using a static (non-productive) Arabic character encoding model? What were the issues and risks the WG2 looked at before making its decision not to encode combining arabic three dots, two dots, etc.? Or did it just follow what the UTC had decided for it? This UTC documented rationale is apparently not to be found on the Unicode Web site (a series of emails among the myriads of archived emails is not a UTC decision, I would take).
Again, I don't consider this a small decision, some minutiae about whether to accept this rare and exotic character or not which may not deserve a written explanation, but a fundamental aspect regarding an important World script.
Ashraf Sadek
-- St Elias Coptic Community
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 07:30:11 CDT