on 4/20/01 12:59 PM, James Kass at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The proposal was written in 1999 and no one has offered
> a different proposal, (AFAIK).
I believe the negative response from the Egyptological community is, in
effect, a proposal - a proposal to do nothing until more research is done on
the Hierglyphic character repertoire. If that is indeed the consensus in
that community we should honor it and leave it at that for the time being.
> The Unicode experts and officials have always welcomed expert
> advice from scholars and specialists.
That has certainly been both my impression and my experience. I can say only
good things about the interactions I have witnessed between wedgeheads and
Unicodeheads!
But "welcoming" is by its nature a rather passive stance. I was only
suggesting that no encoding proposal should be passed without Unicode
"ACTIVELY" seeking and honoring the input from the relevant (scholarly)
communities. In other words, encoding proposals should not be passed by
default (or by the oversight, or ignoring, of relevant documents).
Respectfully,
Dean A. Snyder
Senior Information Technology Specialist, Humanities
Research and Instructional Technologies, 167 Krieger Hall
School of Arts and Sciences, 426A Gilman Hall
The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA 21218
410-516-6021 office
410-961-8943 mobile
410-516-5508 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED] email
