Re: Demystifying the Politburo (was: Re: Arabic encoding model (alas, static!))

Date: Thu Jul 07 2005 - 20:59:22 CDT

  • Next message: Simon Montagu: "Re: Arabic encoding model (alas, static!)"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <>

    > I dunno, I was a newcomer here once--just about all of us were.
    > And most of us managed to "feel welcomed" and say what we needed to.

    But, I suspect, you knew your place and did not doubt and ask too
    many pointed questions ("ranting" in Mr. Whistler's email).

    I asked questions on Coptic (and I am no newcomer to the field): no
    answers. I thought I was polite and sufficiently the humble newcomer
    congratulating the author of the proposal who only meekly wished to
    be enlightened and after an initial strange answer by the said proposer
    was rather puzzled. No answers after several reminders, what am
    I to believe but that my questions are embarrassing because they
    reveal a two small mistakes in the Coptic proposal?
    Again, I don't want to start a controversy but get precise answers to
    my precise questions (CS ligature, why? KHI-RO, CHI-RO double).
    Am I to understand no small punctual mistakes may have slipped
    in Unicode?

    I asked where I could find a documented explanation of why UTC and
    WG2 did not accept the generative Arabic encoding model since I
    think this was a disservice to Arabic users who would have
    to wait a long time to see their rare characters encoded. It took
    some time until I was told in no uncertain terms that they were none
    and that I basically did not understand the perfect working of the
    UTC and WG2, that reasons of refusal are simply not provided by
    those princely bodies (the whole principle reminds me of the Privy
    council rather than the PolitBuro) and that it was me -- who was
    simply asking for consolidated explanations, remember I must
    ask and not suggest as a newcomer -- who had to write a
    document to prove this model would be workable but that it
    would very hard to convince the august bodies that look into
    the petition sent to it!

    I was then surprised that XXXX had been accepted, since I see no
    no use for this, that any script does require resources to support it,
    that a perfectly viable solution already exists. I then learned it was
    a taboo and that it had been the subject of very heated debates
    (and Mr. Whistler speaks of proposal not reaching any consensus
    having no chance of progressing!). I then got a series of answers
    of very dubious analogies (Vai and Cree similar to Hebrew and
    Phoenican! Arabic and Latin similar to Hebrew and Phoenician!
    and this from experts I am told I must revere as a newcomer...)

    The whole thing crowned by a long email implying that newcomers
    who ask pointed questions «start complaining and/or ranting ».

    What a welcome! Permit me not to feel very impressed.

    I will put this very solid defensive display by the Privy Council on
    past disputes I have not been witness, and fatigue from members
    who have mull over the same complex subject [to me] for
    the past 14 years and see the same questions being posed by
    newcomers who may be a bit too frank and entreprising.

    Ashraf Sadek
    (who hopes he can simply now concentrate on Coptic)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 07 2005 - 21:00:20 CDT