Dean Snyder wrote:
What do you suggest I, or others, do other than have such discussions?
Target precisely and selectively.
Pay attention to what Ken Whistler writes, as he can generally be relied on to precisely identify the basis on which a UTC decision might be expected. As he has noted, UTC approval of a proposal to separately encode Phoenician is most likely to be based on an expressed need to distinguish Hebrew and 'Phoenician' in plain text by a specific user community or communities. As he has also noted, expression of an absence of need from a user community does not constitute grounds for ignoring the expression of need from one or more other communities. Get it? The fact that semtiticists do not need and many, apparently, do not want a separate encoding does not override a need expressed by someone else. The fact that *I* do not need and don't particularly want such an encoding does not override a need expressed by someone else. It should follow from this observation that *any* argument based on stating, restating or otherwise asserting semiticists' lack of need for such an encoding is futile *if* reasonable need is expressed by other users.
So there you have your selecte and precise target: the need for plain-text distinction of Hebrew and Phoenician as expressed by other user communities. This is the only target that it is worth attacking, because it is the only target that offers the possibility of victory. You need to identify the user communities that believe they have a need to make a plain-text distinction, and you need to convince them that they don't really need it after all.
Be prepared, however, for the possibility that the expressed need may turn out to be legitimate.
John Hudson
--
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com Vancouver, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Currently reading: Typespaces, by Peter Burnhill White Mughals, by William Dalrymple Hebrew manuscripts of the Middle Ages, by Colette Sirat
