The scope of Unicode (from Re: How can my research become implemented in a standardized manner?)

[William_J_G Overington]

>> If this invention had been made in the research laboratory of a large information technology company maybe things would be very different.
Steven R. Loomis wrote:
> I would not (and have not) leapt from an idea to a document to a standard. I won't repeat the good and helpful advice you have already received. Make your first target a working model, not standardization. That is the way the research laboratory of a large information technology company works. 
Yes, it would be good for me to start by making a working model.
However, I do not have the facilities to do so, nor indeed much of the knowledge and skills to do so either.
So I have tried to do what I can in the hope that what I can produce might act as a catalyst to people wanting to implement the invention in a standardized manner: the standardization right from the start being very important so that there is not proprietaryness about what is put into use, in the hope that lots of people will join in and together produce an elegant and useful implemented system.
Well as at 2:26 pm United Kingdom time today, Saturday, my pdf document has not been added into the Unicode Document Register, nor have I received an email stating that it has been rejected. There is now just over a week to go before the next Unicode Technical Committee meeting, so it remains to be known as to whether the document will be discussed by the Unicode Technical Committee at that meeting.
William Overington
24 October 2015
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20151024/61630331/attachment.html>