Peter Kirk wrote...
> But on the other hand, the lack of a consensus among *any*
> people that they have a need for an encoding does seem to imply that
> there is no need for an encoding.
In this, you are utterly wrong, I'm afraid. We (in UTC) have seen
situations before where one group desires an encoding for a script that is
strongly opposed by another group -- even for the *same* language in the
*same* historical period. We can't ignore the people who ask for the script
to be encoded on the grounds that there happen to be some other people who
don't want or need the encoding! I'm surprised you could even think that.
> I have yet to see ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL
> that ANYONE AT ALL has a need for this encoding.
Ahem. Define "need". On this list we don't have the right set of people to
ask, actually. That is why the proposal has already been forwarded to
other people on other lists who may (or do) want or "need" the encoding.
And as usual, on this public list, this is entirely my own opinion and
does not reflect any official position or policy, even if Peter Kirk pokes
fun at this disclaimer.
Rick
