Subject: Fw: Unicode.org Software Internationalisation Standards & Specifications

From: linuxa linux <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 17:55:39 +0000 (GMT)

Fyi

Regards

Meeku
http://twitter.com/nepotism

--- On Sat, 1/11/08, linuxa linux <[email-masked]> wrote:

> From: linuxa linux <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Unicode.org Software Internationalisation Standards & Specifications
> To: [email-masked]
> Date: Saturday, 1 November, 2008, 4:07 PM
> This portion is from the home page of the Unicode.org
> website:
> 
> "Welcome! The Unicode Consortium enables people around
> the world to use computers in any language." 
> 
> Please show me how to use my computer in any language with
> a demo and if you cannot then say, "Welcome! The
> Unicode Consortium enables people around the world to use
> computers in any language [though there is not as yet a demo
> to show people how this is possible.]"
> 
> "Our members develop the Unicode Standard, Unicode
> Locales (CLDR), and other standards. These specifications
> form the foundation for software internationalization in all
> major operating systems, search engines, applications, and
> the Web." 
> 
> Why then are certain programmers getting baffled by the
> code for example at opensource code applications when they
> are asked to specifically replace all k/K letters to unicode
> 0915 glyph here (1) Style (2) Content (3) User Interface (4)
> Membership (5) Extensions, thus are you saying that your
> standards and specifications not have a
> "framework" for these generic areas because then
> you should say "Our members develop the Unicode
> Standard, Unicode Locales (CLDR), and other standards
> [without a framework]. These specifications form the
> foundation for software internationalization in all major
> operating systems, search engines, applications, and the Web
> [without a framework.]"     
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> Meeku
> http://twitter.com/nepotism

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:52:41 -0600

> the world to use computers in any language."

1.  The Unicode Consortium is not an IETF organization.  Complaining to 
IETF, ICANN, or any other such organization about the statements or 
policies of the Unicode Consortium will have no effect.

> to show people how this is possible.]"

2.  Do you have an example of a written language in which you cannot use 
a Unicode-enabled computer, because of something the Unicode Consortium 
has or has not done?

The Unicode Consortium is not responsible for showing you how to use 
your computer.

> operating systems, search engines, applications, and the Web

3.  The Unicode Consortium cannot be responsible for what baffles 
"certain programmers," whoever they may be.

The Unicode Consortium defines coded characters and their properties and 
general techniques for working with them.  It does not specify or 
mandate particular software development products that must be used to 
make applications compliant.  I don't know if that's what you mean by 
"without a framework"; if not, please clarify.

If you want to *display* a Sanskrit KA *glyph* in place of the typical 
Latin K/k glyphs, which I think is what you want, then any font creator 
can do this for you, without assistance from the Unicode Consortium or 
any other organization.  People have been making fonts with all kinds of 
alternative glyphs for a long time; think of Wingdings and other symbol 
fonts.  The Unicode Consortium does not prescribe what glyphs are to be 
used for what characters, except that the fundamental identity of the 
character is supposed to be preserved.

If you want to *encode* the U+0915 *character* in place of U+004B and 
U+006B, which I don't think is what you really want, but which 
accomplishes the same visual effect with less effort, then:

* There is no problem performing this replacement in text with any 
Unicode-enabled text editor, or in a regular expression: s/[Kk]/क/

* There is no problem creating a keyboard layout for most modern systems 
that substitutes this letter.

You are accusing the Unicode Consortium of making this type of change 
difficult or impossible, but on the contrary, it is exactly because of 
the existence of Unicode/ISO 10646 and the efforts of the Consortium and 
WG2 that it is easy to use the Sanskrit KA character (U+0915) alongside 
Latin letters, including non-ASCII letters (so you can pursue your 
crusade for German or Norwegian text as well as English) without 
complicated ISO 2022-style switching techniques.  As a small example, 
how easy would it have been for me to write "s/[Kk]/क/" as above in a 
standard e-mail without Unicode?

Instead of criticizing organizations, please be specific about what 
operations you want to perform (or want others to perform) and what you 
expect the Unicode Consortium or some other organization to do to enable 
or facilitate this.

> http://twitter.com/nepotism

4.  You have used the word "nepotism" before in similar e-mails.  You 
are aware, aren't you, that the English word "nepotism" refers to the 
granting of political positions, employment, or other favors to one's 
relatives on the basis of personal relationship instead of 
qualifications?  It has nothing to do with organizations working 
together, or holding similar viewpoints, or anything related to this "K 
is evil" campaign.  Continuing to apply the word "nepotism" 
inappropriately to your "opponents" in this effort will only cause 
people to take your effort less seriously, and may cause you personal 
embarrassment as well (though this is probably mitigated by your use of 
only a first name and pseudonym in your postings).

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

---

From: linuxa linux <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 00:41:37 +0000 (GMT)

--- On Sat, 1/11/08, Doug Ewell <[email-masked]> wrote:

> From: Doug Ewell <[email-masked]>............
> 
> 1.  The Unicode Consortium is not an IETF organization. 
> Complaining to IETF, ICANN, or any other such organization
> about the statements or policies of the Unicode Consortium
> will have no effect.

Nevertheless because there is some internet / computer relationship between Unicode.org and IETF.org and did you know Unicode.org blocked that Fyi message I copied to IETF.org from their mailing list.  Thus Unicode.org don't wish to be criticised and they like their mutual appreciation society.

> 2.  Do you have an example of a written language in which
> you cannot use a Unicode-enabled computer, because of
> something the Unicode Consortium has or has not done?
> 
> The Unicode Consortium is not responsible for showing you
> how to use your computer.

Yes actually due to Unicode.org I cannot properly use english language where all the k/K letters are replaced with unicode 0915 glyph via HTML because the line spacings are not all equal.

I don't see at the english unicode table another unicode 0915 glyph shape unicode number that allows choice not to use k/K alphabets.  

I don't see qualitatively / graphically on websites that use unicode the same unicode 0915 glyph shape that you see on the unicode table.

Also there is not a lower case unicode 0915 glyph at sunskrit or at english unicode table.

> 3.  The Unicode Consortium cannot be responsible for what
> baffles "certain programmers," whoever they may
> be.
> 
> The Unicode Consortium defines coded characters and their
> properties and general techniques for working with them.  It
> does not specify or mandate particular software development
> products that must be used to make applications compliant. 
> I don't know if that's what you mean by

Unicode.org Software Internationalisation Standards & Specifications are sans / without "framework."  Thus certain programmers are getting baffled where to "locate" these generic areas, (1) Style (2) Content (3) User Interface (4) Membership (5) Extensions at certain opensource applications, where they can remove the k/K letters and replace them with unicode 0915 glyph.  

Unicode.org is trying to falsely say on it's website what it's doing things without clarifying.  Thus I put the points about "demo" and "framework."    

> 4.  You have used the word "nepotism" before in
> similar e-mails.  You are aware, aren't you, that the
> English word "nepotism" refers to the granting of
> political positions, employment, or other favors to
> one's relatives on the basis of personal relationship
> instead of qualifications?  It has nothing to do with
> organizations working together, or holding similar
> viewpoints, or anything related to this "K is
> evil" campaign.  Continuing to apply the word
> "nepotism" inappropriately to your
> "opponents" in this effort will only cause people
> to take your effort less seriously, and may cause you
> personal embarrassment as well (though this is probably
> mitigated by your use of only a first name and pseudonym in
> your postings).

Unicode.org and IETF.org can also have nepotism and this can be evidenced from final decisions and mid-way deliberations, where you find a biased decisions and individuals. Perhaps you can put the words "organisational" / "corporate" before the word "nepotism" if it helps you.  I wish to point out this nepotism tendency.  I hope this effort will be seen constructively.

Regards

Meeku