On 06/21/2002 04:38:08 AM "William Overington" wrote:
>I feel that any attempt to delete the word published from the standard would >need to be investigated for possible antitrust law violation. You are strongly overreacting. How can a consortium with unrestricted membership and with a current membership that is divers, coming from different sectors (some IT industry, some government, some academic, some non-profit) and that has sole ownership of it's own standard possibly be accused of antitrust law violation? > As the >standards need to get past ISO and that has, I think, on it delegations >exercising powers delegated by national governments, then European Union >Antitrust Law may well protect at least those of us within the European >Union against such goalpost moving. It appears to me that the only goalpost moving is in your mind, because, apparently, you have not grasped the full worldview of the Unicode Standard. >However, that allowance of agreements between >businesses does not continue if changes are made which start impacting upon >other people's opportunities. The word published is in the standard, that >is the opportunity which has been provided and that has lead to my >publishing my collections of code points. When people sit around a table to >discuss the possibility of revising the standard, they need to remember that >they are there with certain powers yet certain obligations to the public as >well. > >I have exercised the rights granted by the specification and published some >code point assignments. It seems to me that you are getting yourself into quite a lather over nothing: you rights in this manner are not about to be restricted. >The specification says what it says. If it is to be changed for clarity >that is one thing, yet if a claim of changes for the sake of clarity is used >as a smokescreen for moving the goalposts so as to marginalize opportunities >of individuals because it is inconvenient to big business then that is >another matter entirely. (Are you into conspiracy theories, BTW? :-) The Consortium is not just big business interests. No changes to the standard are made due to hidden, malicious agendas. Nobody is knowingly being marginalised because of inconvenience to big businesses. Nobody's right to publish their use of PUA codepoints is about to be restricted. - Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
