On Saturday 5 June 2010, Mark E. Shoulson <[email protected]> wrote:
> It isn't and should not be the Unicode Consortium's job to sort through
> incoming ideas and decide which ones are nifty enough to encode.
> Unicode isn't here to make your dreams come true. It's here to encode what's
> there and to enable people to do what they've already been doing, not what
> you think it would be cool if they did.
Well, in between the items you mention, there is the possibility of encoding
what is becoming there as a result of a Public Review and research and
development activity by whoever chooses to participate and enabling people to
do in a standardized way what they are finding during the Public Review and
research and development process that they can do.
I am hoping to submit a document to the Unicode Technical Committee in the hope
that the Unicode Technical Committee will institute a Public Review.
I feel that the possibility of the Unicode Technical Committee instituting such
a Public Review would be increased if there were support for such a Public
Review to take place.
I feel that a Public Review conducted by the Unicode Technical Committee would
be a good way to decide whether to encode a portable interpretable object code
into Unicode.
William Overington
7 June 2010
