Variation Sequences (and L2-11/059)

[Janusz S. Bień via Unicode]

On Wed, Mar 13 2019 at  9:48 -07, Ken Whistler wrote:
> On 3/13/2019 2:42 AM, Janusz S. Bień via Unicode wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 16 2018 at  7:07 +02, Janusz S. Bień via Unicode wrote:
>>> FAQ (http://unicode.org/faq/vs.html) states:
>>>
>>>      For historic scripts, the variation sequence provides a useful tool,
>>>      because it can show mistaken or nonce glyphs and relate them to the
>>>      base character. It can also be used to reflect the views of
>>>      scholars, who may see the relation between the glyphs and base
>>>      characters differently. Also, new variation sequences can be added
>>>      for new variant appearances (and their relation to the base
>>>      characters) as more evidence is discovered.
>> I'm proof-reading a paper where I quote the above fragment and to my
>> surprise I noticed it's no longer present in the FAQ.
>
> That text is, in fact, still present on the FAQ page in question:
>
> https://www.unicode.org/faq/vs.html#18

I apologize for jumping to the wrong conclusion, I should check it more
carefully.

>
>>
>> So my question are:
>>
>> 1. Does the change mean the change of the official policy of the
>> Consortium?
>
> Your premise here, however, is mistaken. The FAQ pages do *not*, and
> never have represented official policy of the Unicode Consortium.

That I expected but asked just to be on the safe side.

> The
> individual FAQ entries are contributed by many people -- some
> attributed, and some not. They are updated or added to periodically by
> various editors, in response to feedback, or as old entries grow
> out-dated, or new issues arise. Those updates are editorial, and do
> not reflect any official decision process by Unicode technical
> committees or officers. The FAQ main page itself points out that "The
> FAQs are contributed by many people," and invites the public to submit
> possible new entries for editing and addition to the list of FAQs.

BTW, what about copyright of FAQ entries? Do I guess correctly it
belongs to the consortium? To be specific, what about using and entry in
full in English or in translation as or in a Wikipedia entry?

>
> For official technical content, refer to the published technical
> specifications themselves, which are carefully controlled, versioned,
> and archived.
>
> For official policies of the Unicode Consortium, refer to the Unicode
> Consortium policies page, which is also carefully controlled:
>
> https://www.unicode.org/policies/policies.html

Thanks for reminding.


>> 2. Are the archival versions of the FAQ available somewhere?
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.unicode.org/faq/

Great!

Best regards

Janusz

-- 
             ,   
Janusz S. Bien
emeryt (emeritus)
https://sites.google.com/view/jsbien