Michael Kaplan wrote:
Lets consider the fact that what you are looking for is summarized at the
end of your message: "I hope to gain fairly widespread agreement within the
unicode user community."
end quote
The quote is an excerpt from a sentence. The whole sentence is as follows.
The suggestion is open for discussion and I hope to gain fairly widespread
agreement within the unicode user community.
Michael continues:
I submit that this very desire is a violation of the entire spirit of the
PUA, which is about PRIVATE USE and thus widespread acceptance is neither
needed nor desired. You can attribute the frustration you are feeling as due
to this single reason more than any other.
end quote
In everyday life there are laws, specifications and agreements. These all
contain rules. There exist the concepts of "working within the letter of
the rules", "working within the spirit of the rules", "working within the
letter and the spirit of the rules" and "working within the letter but not
the spirit of the rules".
I feel that the concept of the spirit of the rules is very important:
however, I feel that the spirit of the rules cannot possibly be such that it
*contradicts* the letter of the rules. The rules for the private use area
specifically include as an example of possible use ".... or they could be
published as vendor-specific character assignments available to applications
and end users." The letter of the specification is that there could be
publication. The letter of the specification is that this publication could
be by way of trade. Publication does not require any agreement, it can be
unilateral action. I feel that my hope to gain fairly widespread agreement
within the unicode user community is well within both the letter and the
spirit of the specification.
As to my feeling, well you surprised me there! I am feeling no frustration
whatsoever. I have had a good week of research on a fascinating topic, I
have had the benefit of reading the views of top experts on the unicode
system as they debated the issues that arose. It is as if I have been given
the privilege to spend a week as a guest in the common room of a top
university debating with top scholars on an aspect of world class leading
edge research. I have learned much. I had seen tags previously in passing
but, as a result of the matter being raised, I have learned more of them. I
feel that I now have a broad understanding of what action is needed to solve
the problem. I have a (basic) understanding of the technical issues and
also have become aware of the policy issues and the fascinating way that the
potential for chaos has been recognized but will possibly not be acted upon
officially until chaos occurs. I am reminded of the Millennium bug and the
fact that that was envisaged as a potential cause of chaos during the 1990s
and the way that that was acted on before 1 January 2000 rather than after 1
January 2000. I remember the way that, having heard talk of the Millennium
bug during the 1990s I was startled when Channel 4 News on the television
here in the United Kingdom announced early in 1998 that the Millennium bug
had struck! A man had tried to buy something in a shop with his newly
issued replacement credit card. The expiry date was 01/00 and the shop
could not get the online automated electronic system to issue an
authorization code for the purchase transaction and had to use a manual
credit card machine with the multilayer pieces of paper. I am absolutely
fascinated by the way that the Unicode Consortium, having recognized that
the specification opens a window to potential chaos appears to prefer to
wait until the chaos actually happens and then reported back before even
starting a process of considering what to do about it.
As you raise the issue of feelings I mention that a search on the web for
Myers Briggs type indicator is interesting. It is sometimes called
Myers-Briggs type indicator, using a hyphen. The web site
www.new-oceans.co.uk is a good site for the Myers Briggs type indicator.
The Myers Briggs type indicator is based on the teachings of Carl Gustav
Jung. It is fascinating and will hopefully give an insight into how
different people, based on their personalities, can view matters in entirely
different ways.
Another interesting aspect of psychology related to feelings is the
Yerkes-Dodson law. I wish it were more widely known about. So, the matter
of feelings having been raised I take the opportunity to mention it here so
that anyone interested might like to search the web and hopefully enjoy what
they find. A serendipitous link to follow up perhaps?
William Overington
28 April 2001
