Michael Everson wrote as follows. > I do the best I can. At the end of the day my document won its case and the five characters were accepted.
This raises an interesting matter. In that the document proposes U+2693 for FLEUR-DE-LIS it would seem not unreasonable for fontmakers now to be able to produce fonts having a FLEUR-DE-LIS glyph at U+2693. However, what is the correct approach? Is it that the characters must remain either unimplemented or else implemented as Private Use Area characters until Unicode 4.1 or whatever is published, notwithstanding that the hardcopy Unicode 4.0 book is not yet available? That will probably take quite some time. It appears to me that there should be some system devised so that when a few extra symbols are accepted into an already established area that those characters can be implemented in a proper manner much more quickly than at present. However, such speeding up of the process might not always be a benefit. For example, the proposed U+267F which has, in the document the name HANDICAPPED SIGN could, if there were a fast track process, be all the more quickly incorporated into databases as a way for officials to make automated decisions about people much more conveniently without considering the individual circumstances of each person so tagged. I am rather concerned that the name HANDICAPPED SIGN is being used without any jusitication or discussion of the name of the character. The character has now been accepted it appears. I am rather concerned about the Orwellian nightmare possibilities of this and believe that vigilance is a necessary activity to protect freedom. Just think, data about someone can be expressed with one character which can be sent around the world to be stored in a database which is not necessarily in a jurisdiction which has laws about data protection. Automated decision making is a matter covered by United Kingdom data protection law, yet does the law have any effect in practice? For example, some credit card application documents now have in the small print items about the applicant agreeing to accept automated decisions. And also, does every user of computer equipment obey the law? I gather that in the United States there is a concept of a Social Security number and that it has now become the widespread practice that people who are nothing to do with the administration of social security now routinely ask (and maybe even require) someone to state his or her social security number before they can do anything. I wonder what is the effect of saying that the number is for social security purposes and one is not willing to state what it is. Perhaps even questioning why that information is needed will go against one. The issue of the name for what Michael has named as HANDICAPPED SIGN needs, in my opinion, some discussion. If that discussion widens into what purposes for which Unicode could or should be used and whether the political and social implications of encoding symbols is something of which people should be aware, then fine. For example, would DISABILITY LOGO be a better name? I have seen the logo used in signs in shops with the message "Happy to help" referring to help for people with any disability where help is wanted, not just for people in wheelchairs. So having the logo in fonts so that such signs could be printed might well be helpful. Yet I feel that some discussion about the implications of encoding this logo need to take place, particularly as the N2586R document suggests as seemingly obvious the potential for use in databases. For example, could the sign be made as not to be interchanged? Is it best not to encode it in Unicode at all as being too dangerous in some of its potential applications? If this symbol is implemented without some protection for rights, could there be a basis for compensation by someone disadvantaged by the use of such a symbol in a database? An Orwellian nightmare scenario of just encoding the symbols and "leaving it to" people who use Unicode as to how they use the symbols is not attractive. William Overington 24 June 2003
