VS: [somewhat off topic] straw poll

[Rick McGowan]

Doug, et al --

The primordial statement you're looking for is in TUS, Chapter 1 and has 
been there forever. See:

http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/ch01.pdf

In section 1.1, page 3:

*Note, however, that the Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic, 
personal, novel, or private-use characters, nor does it encode logos or 
graphics.*

I'm not sure UTC has ever made any specific pronouncement on the topic, 
but they do sometimes add things to the notice of non-approvals, which 
can generally be taken as a precedent.

http://unicode.org/alloc/nonapprovals.html

If there is any such statement from the UTC, Ken Whsitler would probably 
be the one who could put his hand upon it most quickly. :-)

R.




On 9/11/2015 10:25 AM, Doug Ewell wrote:
> I absolutely agree that UTC -- the technical committee, not the
> corporation -- should issue a formal statement expressing its position
> as to:
>
> 1. Generally, whether novel and untested concepts, particularly those
> for which a sizable body of popular support has not been established,
> are viewed by UTC as suitable and appropriate candidates for encoding in
> the Unicode Standard, on the basis of their perceived future usefulness.
> (I believe this statement has been made already; if so, a reference that
> can be easily cited would serve the purpose.)
>
> 2. Specifically, whether the particular concept that William proposes,
> to encode entities that are not characters into the Unicode Standard on
> the basis of their perceived future usefulness, is viewed by UTC as
> being suitable for and appropriate to the standard.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20150911/ddb9efe1/attachment.html>