Arabic for South Sudan languages
pandey at umich.edu
Tue Oct 12 20:37:54 CDT 2021
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 1:24 PM Asmus Freytag <asmusf at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> On 10/10/2021 9:15 PM, Anshuman Pandey via Unicode wrote:
> But, I denounce the encoding in the Unicode standard of any new sign that results from coercive practices. I want to see **natural** support and usage. Not people being forced to use new signs. Disgusting. Just because a particular political group took over some area, does not compel Unicode to accept their coercion.
> Preventing people from using an orthography because you dislike their
> reason for using it shouldn't be one of the process goals. Where do you
> draw the line? Prescriptive orthography reform?
> Now, the reverse would be true. If someone came and said "we've outlawed
> the following orthography/characters" that's not a reason for Unicode do
> mark them deprecated or to overturn stability and delete them.
You're absolutely right.
Actually, I'm a bit ashamed of myself for letting my historian's
objectivity get clouded by the phantoms of 'coercive practices'. It was
arrogant to gauge the suitability of encoding characters and scripts by
factoring in their political provenance or manner of origin.
After all, as David Starner mentioned, the proliferation of dominant world
writing systems was likely the result of less-than-democratic practices.
James Kass is also spot on in his remark that historical texts require
preservation, without bias.
I renounce my denounce.
All my best,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode