Piotr Grochowski wrote: > In fact, I believe the arguments in L2/25-010 are so blatantly wrong, > as I disproved them in multiple different ways, that I suspect there > is some lobbying involved. This is potentially dangerous because of > the possibility that lobbying will eventually affect the > interpretation of stability policies, which would effectively result > in actual compatibility breaking changes.
As one of the co-authors of the legacy symbols proposals, I will state that if the Script Encoding Working Group and/or UTC, whose wisdom and judgment on such things I trust, determine that additional characters are justified, I will assist in preparing any necessary proposals. As a participant on the Unicode public mailing list for more than 27 years, I would suggest that accusing the encoding committees, or other contributors, of treachery or malfeasance is usually not an effective way to influence encoding decisions. -- Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org
