On 2019-11-19 11:00 PM, Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode wrote:
Why so concerned with these minutiæ? Were you in fact misled? (Doesn't sound like it.) Do you know someone who was, or whom you fear would be? What incorrect conclusions might they draw from that misunderstanding, and how serious would they be? Doesn't sound like this is really anything serious even if you were right.
Anyone unfamiliar with our timeline, such as a millennial, might be led to believe that Unicode was in place before personal computers existed. A bit of research would have dispelled that notion. But thereafter any assertion from Unicode would be suspect.
Limiting the claims to text, as Asmus Freytag suggests, might be too limiting. Many people may not realize how prevalent textual data really is in our exchanges of information. Imagine producing a video offering closed captioning/subtitling in French, Italian, and Hebrew without the underlying foundation of Unicode.
Rather than limiting this to text, why not substitute something for the word "foundation"? For example:
The Unicode Standard is the lodestar for all modern software and communications around the world, ...
