Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Sarasvati]

Good morning everyone!

This topic has probably now received enough attention,
and thank you to all who have contributed. Let us
please move along to something else.

Everyone should now point their web browsers at
the list policies and guidelines to refresh themselves:
http://unicode.org/policies/mail_policy.html

The main point to remember in the current context is
that discussions of mail list policy are out of scope
for this list. If you have problems with a subscriber,
or with how a topic is unfolding, please write to the
staff, not to the list.

Moderation on this list has always been very light,
and mainly to assure a basic level of civility in the
discussions. If you have a problem with that, please
consider filing a complaint via the contact form or
contacting the offending user privately.
http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html

Your,

-- Sarasavati

Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Daniel Bünzli]

Le vendredi, 11 septembre 2015 à 18:37, Mark Davis ☕️ a écrit :
> BTW, the only way I see anything from Overington is when a message is quoted 
> by someone else, since I long ago filtered those out of my email inbox.


When I read this message [1] (which I disagree with but that's another issue) I 
thought you were a moderator on this list. If that is the case then I don't 
think you should base your moderation of having your own personal filter over 
the mailing list. If you are not the actual moderator for the list then forget 
about this message.  

Whoever the moderator is on this list, I think (s)he doing a pretty bad job at 
it.  

Best,

Daniel


[1] http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2015-m06/0249.html  

RE: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Doug Ewell]

Rick McGowan  wrote:

> In section 1.1, page 3:
>
> *Note, however, that the Unicode Standard does not encode
> idiosyncratic, personal, novel, or private-use characters, nor does it
> encode logos or graphics.*

Is there a statement anywhere about entities that aren't characters in
any sense, other than having an arbitrary glyph assigned to them in a
font somewhere?

What about encoding things on speculation of future use, without a clear
indication of imminent adoption -- the criterion applied to the euro
sign, and more recently to emoji?

> I'm not sure UTC has ever made any specific pronouncement on the
> topic, but they do sometimes add things to the notice of non-approvals, which
> can generally be taken as a precedent.

Unfortunately for those hoping for a definitive statement, even
non-approvals are occasionally overturned; U+1E9E LATIN CAPITAL LETTER
SHARP S leaps to mind. Evidently nothing short of a specific
pronouncement on this specific topic will suffice.

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸

RE: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Peter Constable]

UTC can act on documents submitted to it, or to input submitted to it via the 
contact form (http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html), but will not act in 
response solely to topics discussed in this list.

-Original Message-
From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 11:11 AM
To: Mark Davis ☕️ 
Cc: Unicode Mailing List 
Subject: RE: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

Mark Davis 🍗  wrote:

> I suggest that you create a proposal for the UTC so that it can go on 
> record; I suspect it will get a favorable reception.

I assume this was not meant for me personally. I have no authority to speak for 
UTC. The closest I ever got to that was when I got UTN #14 published.

I'm serious about this (unlike the beer color modifiers). This statement needs 
to come officially and formally from UTC, as William suggested, not from 
randoms like me.

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸

RE: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Doug Ewell]

Mark Davis 🍗  wrote:

> I suggest that you create a proposal for the UTC so that it can go on
> record; I suspect it will get a favorable reception.

I assume this was not meant for me personally. I have no authority to
speak for UTC. The closest I ever got to that was when I got UTN #14
published.

I'm serious about this (unlike the beer color modifiers). This statement
needs to come officially and formally from UTC, as William suggested,
not from randoms like me.

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸

Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Rick McGowan]

Doug, et al --

The primordial statement you're looking for is in TUS, Chapter 1 and has 
been there forever. See:


http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/ch01.pdf

In section 1.1, page 3:

*Note, however, that the Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic, 
personal, novel, or private-use characters, nor does it encode logos or 
graphics.*


I'm not sure UTC has ever made any specific pronouncement on the topic, 
but they do sometimes add things to the notice of non-approvals, which 
can generally be taken as a precedent.


http://unicode.org/alloc/nonapprovals.html

If there is any such statement from the UTC, Ken Whsitler would probably 
be the one who could put his hand upon it most quickly. :-)


R.




On 9/11/2015 10:25 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:

I absolutely agree that UTC -- the technical committee, not the
corporation -- should issue a formal statement expressing its position
as to:

1. Generally, whether novel and untested concepts, particularly those
for which a sizable body of popular support has not been established,
are viewed by UTC as suitable and appropriate candidates for encoding in
the Unicode Standard, on the basis of their perceived future usefulness.
(I believe this statement has been made already; if so, a reference that
can be easily cited would serve the purpose.)

2. Specifically, whether the particular concept that William proposes,
to encode entities that are not characters into the Unicode Standard on
the basis of their perceived future usefulness, is viewed by UTC as
being suitable for and appropriate to the standard.

Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Mark Davis ☕️]

BTW, the only way I see anything from Overington is when a message is
quoted by someone else, since I long ago filtered those out of my email
inbox.


Mark 

*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Mark Davis ☕️  wrote:

> I suggest that you create a proposal for the UTC so that it can go on
> record; I suspect it will get a favorable reception.
>
>
> Mark 
>
> *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Doug Ewell  wrote:
>
>> William_J_G Overington 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > If Unicode Inc. chooses to impose a moratorium on discussing this
>> > development in information technology then Unicode Inc. should say so
>> > officially and post a policy document and not have this unfair
>> > imposition of a moratorium by a person or persons unknown.
>>
>> Finally, something on which William and I can agree.
>>
>> I absolutely agree that UTC -- the technical committee, not the
>> corporation -- should issue a formal statement expressing its position
>> as to:
>>
>> 1. Generally, whether novel and untested concepts, particularly those
>> for which a sizable body of popular support has not been established,
>> are viewed by UTC as suitable and appropriate candidates for encoding in
>> the Unicode Standard, on the basis of their perceived future usefulness.
>> (I believe this statement has been made already; if so, a reference that
>> can be easily cited would serve the purpose.)
>>
>> 2. Specifically, whether the particular concept that William proposes,
>> to encode entities that are not characters into the Unicode Standard on
>> the basis of their perceived future usefulness, is viewed by UTC as
>> being suitable for and appropriate to the standard.
>>
>> Whichever position is taken by this statement, pro or con, this list
>> should honor it.
>>
>> > Also, it is not a worn-out topic. It is a wonderful possibility for
>> > the future.
>>
>> --
>> Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Mark Davis ☕️]

I suggest that you create a proposal for the UTC so that it can go on
record; I suspect it will get a favorable reception.


Mark 

*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Doug Ewell  wrote:

> William_J_G Overington 
> wrote:
>
> > If Unicode Inc. chooses to impose a moratorium on discussing this
> > development in information technology then Unicode Inc. should say so
> > officially and post a policy document and not have this unfair
> > imposition of a moratorium by a person or persons unknown.
>
> Finally, something on which William and I can agree.
>
> I absolutely agree that UTC -- the technical committee, not the
> corporation -- should issue a formal statement expressing its position
> as to:
>
> 1. Generally, whether novel and untested concepts, particularly those
> for which a sizable body of popular support has not been established,
> are viewed by UTC as suitable and appropriate candidates for encoding in
> the Unicode Standard, on the basis of their perceived future usefulness.
> (I believe this statement has been made already; if so, a reference that
> can be easily cited would serve the purpose.)
>
> 2. Specifically, whether the particular concept that William proposes,
> to encode entities that are not characters into the Unicode Standard on
> the basis of their perceived future usefulness, is viewed by UTC as
> being suitable for and appropriate to the standard.
>
> Whichever position is taken by this statement, pro or con, this list
> should honor it.
>
> > Also, it is not a worn-out topic. It is a wonderful possibility for
> > the future.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸
>
>
>

Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Doug Ewell]

William_J_G Overington 
wrote:

> If Unicode Inc. chooses to impose a moratorium on discussing this
> development in information technology then Unicode Inc. should say so
> officially and post a policy document and not have this unfair
> imposition of a moratorium by a person or persons unknown. 

Finally, something on which William and I can agree.

I absolutely agree that UTC -- the technical committee, not the
corporation -- should issue a formal statement expressing its position
as to:

1. Generally, whether novel and untested concepts, particularly those
for which a sizable body of popular support has not been established,
are viewed by UTC as suitable and appropriate candidates for encoding in
the Unicode Standard, on the basis of their perceived future usefulness.
(I believe this statement has been made already; if so, a reference that
can be easily cited would serve the purpose.)

2. Specifically, whether the particular concept that William proposes,
to encode entities that are not characters into the Unicode Standard on
the basis of their perceived future usefulness, is viewed by UTC as
being suitable for and appropriate to the standard.

Whichever position is taken by this statement, pro or con, this list
should honor it.

> Also, it is not a worn-out topic. It is a wonderful possibility for
> the future. 

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸

Re: VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[William_J_G Overington]

Erkki I. Kolehmainen wrote:

> I, for one, don't see any reason to lift the moratorium on that particular 
> worn-out topic. 

One reason is that there is the new idea of using the base character followed 
by a sequence of tag characters technique to represent each localizable 
sentence. Thus only one new character would need to become encoded into regular 
Unicode.

Yet there are other reasons too.

One is that the moratorium was not stated as being imposed either by Unicode 
Inc. or by any of the people named on the following web page.

http://www.unicode.org/consortium/directors.html

If Unicode Inc. chooses to impose a moratorium on discussing this development 
in information technology then Unicode Inc. should say so officially and post a 
policy document and not have this unfair imposition of a moratorium by a person 
or persons unknown. 

Also, it is not a worn-out topic. It is a wonderful possibility for the future.

William Overington

11 September 2015

VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Erkki I Kolehmainen]

I, for one, don't see any reason to lift the moratorium on that particular 
worn-out topic. 

Sincerely,

Erkki I. Kolehmainen

-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] Puolesta William_J_G 
Overington
Lähetetty: 11. syyskuuta 2015 16:07
Vastaanottaja: asmus-...@ix.netcom.com; richard.wording...@ntlworld.com; Marcel 
Schneider; unicode@unicode.org; shawn.ste...@microsoft.com; 
peter...@microsoft.com
Aihe: Re: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

Richard Wordingham wrote:

> So, what has become of ...

I hope that that does not start again.

It is unfair dealing.

Please look at the way that I was treated by a person or persons unknown.

http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2015-m06/0208.html

I do not understand why the request for a moratorium was not made either to 
Unicode Inc. or to one or more of the people named on the following web page.

http://www.unicode.org/consortium/directors.html

I do not know why the moratorium was imposed by a person or persons unknown.

I have been put back onto moderated post status as a result of the moratorium 
being imposed and I am still on it.

Although it is called a moratorium there was no indication of whether or how 
the moratorium would be removed.

I have simply had to try to make progress in other ways than by posting to the 
Unicode list.

I am hoping to send a document to the Unicode Technical Committee about 
encoding one character into Unicode so as to enable my invention to become 
implemented.

The moratorium prevents discussion in the mailing list prior to submission.

I am hoping that the moratorium will be removed, yet it is something that I 
cannot apply for as I do not know where to apply!

William Overington

11 September 2015







!