RE: Arabic encoding model (alas, static!)

From: Peter Constable (
Date: Thu Jul 07 2005 - 09:07:30 CDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Old Hebrew, extra Uniscribe work (Re: Arabic encoding model (alas, static!))"

    > From: Dean Snyder []

    > >Suppose there has *never* been an instance in which WG2 rejected a
    > >UTC recommendation. What would you derive from that?
    > I would assert that the burden of proof is on you and others to
    > establish that the WG2 is not a rubber stamp of the UTC.

    Ah, so you would derive that WG2 is a rubber stamp. That is not at all a
    valid logical conclusion.

    So, you'd put the burden on me (or whomever) to establish this is not
    the case. Why? Who's conducting an inquiry and why? Is this needed for
    some criminal investigation? Or simply to satisfy the whims of certain

    If the latter, WG2 does not have to answer to those individuals. It has
    to answer to SC2, and ultimately to the members of ISO.

    Peter Constable

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 07 2005 - 09:08:22 CDT