William Overington offered a suggestion, ⇒ Maybe people should be helping to get this resolved ⇒ to the satisfaction of all and helping rather than ⇒ criticising.
That's a noble thought, but as long as Assamese continues to be written using the Eastern Nagari script, which is referred to as "BENGALI" in the Unicode naming tables, any disunification proposal will be a non-starter. Hence the criticism. We should strive to keep any criticism constructive rather than derisive. If I'm not mistaken, the character naming for this script was inherited from the ISCII standard, so it was the Indian government's convention. I believe most English speakers aware of the script call it Bengali. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Nagari_script ⇒ U+E0001 LANGUAGE TAG ⇒ ⇒ ... ⇒ ⇒ There is a note in the code chart. ⇒ ⇒ >> This character is deprecated, and its use is strongly ⇒ discouraged. ⇒ ⇒ It does not say by whom it is discouraged though nor why. The reason people shouldn't use it is because it is deprecated. It was originally deprecated because people shouldn't use it. Arguably, a plain-text computer character encoding standard which is language-neutral does not need a language tagging mechanism. By encoding scripts rather than languages, Unicode ensures that the data is legible in plain-text. If the recipient of an untagged plain-text file doesn't know the language well enough to recognize it, then a tag won't help. If the recipient wants to translate it anyway, various on-line translators are fairly sophisticated in language identification. If that fails, it's a mystery. Everybody loves a mystery.
