On Saturday 05 June 2010 12:59:34 pm Rick McGowan wrote: > On 6/5/2010 10:42 AM, Doug Ewell wrote, responding to Luke-jr: > >> "Draft" characters would be ones which are not final and can be > >> removed or replaced in the future, if they don't in the meantime gain > >> popularity within some reasonable timeframe. > > > > There is no precedent for this in either Unicode or ISO/IEC 10646. If > > you think it has been difficult persuading people that your characters > > should be encoded in the existing framework, just try suggesting a > > basic architectural change like this. > > Speaking only with my person opinion on this one poin: Doug is right. > This won't happen. Once you have characters in real usage because a > standard was released that contains them, even if the standard called > them "draft", you'd have data "in the wild" that could potentially > become non-conformant.
And the alternative is data "in the wild" that never had a chance to be conformant because the standard makes them impossible.
