On Wed, Mar 13 2019 at 9:48 -07, Ken Whistler wrote: > On 3/13/2019 2:42 AM, Janusz S. Bień via Unicode wrote: >> Hi! >> >> On Mon, Jul 16 2018 at 7:07 +02, Janusz S. Bień via Unicode wrote: >>> FAQ (http://unicode.org/faq/vs.html) states: >>> >>> For historic scripts, the variation sequence provides a useful tool, >>> because it can show mistaken or nonce glyphs and relate them to the >>> base character. It can also be used to reflect the views of >>> scholars, who may see the relation between the glyphs and base >>> characters differently. Also, new variation sequences can be added >>> for new variant appearances (and their relation to the base >>> characters) as more evidence is discovered. >> I'm proof-reading a paper where I quote the above fragment and to my >> surprise I noticed it's no longer present in the FAQ. > > That text is, in fact, still present on the FAQ page in question: > > https://www.unicode.org/faq/vs.html#18
I apologize for jumping to the wrong conclusion, I should check it more carefully. > >> >> So my question are: >> >> 1. Does the change mean the change of the official policy of the >> Consortium? > > Your premise here, however, is mistaken. The FAQ pages do *not*, and > never have represented official policy of the Unicode Consortium. That I expected but asked just to be on the safe side. > The > individual FAQ entries are contributed by many people -- some > attributed, and some not. They are updated or added to periodically by > various editors, in response to feedback, or as old entries grow > out-dated, or new issues arise. Those updates are editorial, and do > not reflect any official decision process by Unicode technical > committees or officers. The FAQ main page itself points out that "The > FAQs are contributed by many people," and invites the public to submit > possible new entries for editing and addition to the list of FAQs. BTW, what about copyright of FAQ entries? Do I guess correctly it belongs to the consortium? To be specific, what about using and entry in full in English or in translation as or in a Wikipedia entry? > > For official technical content, refer to the published technical > specifications themselves, which are carefully controlled, versioned, > and archived. > > For official policies of the Unicode Consortium, refer to the Unicode > Consortium policies page, which is also carefully controlled: > > https://www.unicode.org/policies/policies.html Thanks for reminding. >> 2. Are the archival versions of the FAQ available somewhere? > > https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.unicode.org/faq/ Great! Best regards Janusz -- , Janusz S. Bien emeryt (emeritus) https://sites.google.com/view/jsbien
