The Unicode Standard and ISO
Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Fri Jun 8 06:06:18 CDT 2018
Where are you getting your "facts"? Among many unsubstantiated or ambiguous
claims in that very long sentence:
1. "French locale in CLDR is still surprisingly incomplete".
1. For each release, the data collected for the French locale is
complete to the bar we have set for Level=Modern.
2. What you may mean is that CLDR doesn't support a structure that
you think it should. For that, you have to make a compelling
case that the
structure you propose is worth it, worth diverting people from other
2. French contributors are not "prevented from cooperating". Where do
you get this from? Who do you mean?
1. We have many French contribute data over time. Now, it works
better when people engage under the umbrella of an organization, but even
there that doesn't have to be a company; we have liaison
government agencies and NGOs.
3. There were not "many attempts" at a merger, and Unicode didn't
"refuse" anything. Who do you think "attempted", and when?
1. Albeit given the state of ISO/IEC 15897, there was nothing such a
merger would have contributed anyway.
2. BTW, your use of the term "refuse" might be a language issue. I
don't "refuse" to respond to the widow of a Nigerian Prince who wants to
give me $1M. Since I don't think it is worth my time, or am not
willing to upfront the low, low fee of $10K, I might "ignore" the
email, or "not respond" to it. Or I might "decline" it with a
not-interested response. But none of that is to "refuse" it.
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 5:32 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 22:46:12 +0300, Erkki I. Kolehmainen via Unicode wrote:
> > I cannot but fully agree with Mark and Michael.
> > Sincerely
> Thank you for confirming. All witnesses concur to invalidate the statement
> uniqueness of ISO/IEC 10646 ‐ Unicode synchrony. — After being invented in
> actual form, sorting was standardized simultaneously in ISO/IEC 14651 and
> Unicode Collation Algorithm, the latter including practice‐oriented extra
> Since then, these two standards are kept in synchrony uninterruptedly.
> Getting people to correct the overall response was not really my initial
> however. What bothered me before I learned that Unicode refuses to
> with ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 is that the registration of the French locale in
> CLDR is
> still surprisingly incomplete despite the meritorious efforts made by the
> contributors, and then after some investigation, that the main part of the
> French contributors are prevented from cooperating because Unicode refuses
> cooperate with ISO/IEC on locale data while ISO/IEC 15897 predates CLDR,
> reportedly after many attempts made to merge both standards, remaining
> unsuccessful without any striking exposure or friendly agreement to avoid
> kind of
> an impression of unconcerned rebuff.
> Best regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode