Mark E. Shoulson wrote at 9:42 AM on Friday, May 7, 2004:You've responded to us, not them. At this point, Unicode, the "non-experts," have some experts saying "we need Phoenician" and some experts saying "no we don't." If this is to be resolved, the experts need to fight it out among themselves. You can't say "here are reasons you shouldn't listen to them," you need to say to *them* "here's why you should change your recommendation." Otherwise, we're back in the state where some want and some don't, and the response to that has to be to provide those that want with what they want and let the others not use it.
Dean Snyder wrote:
See posts by Deborah Anderson and Paul James Cowie. Is that enough? Or are they not expert enough or something?We need EXPLICIT reasons to justify a new encoding. Just saying that somebody wants it in XML because their font won't show up is insufficient justification, especially when the repercussions in the scholarly communities who actually use this stuff could be disruptive.
I've read and responded to their emails here. I do not impugne their
expertise; we just disagree on this issue.
Obviously one can find experts on both sides of this debate.Experts that need something should not be told "You can't have it because we have other experts who don't like it."
~mark
