Difference between Klingon and Tengwar
kenwhistler at sonic.net
Tue Sep 14 18:18:50 CDT 2021
On 9/14/2021 3:52 PM, Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode wrote:
> Which I guess brings things back full-circle. If the reason for 87-M3
> is no longer valid, why refuse to rescind it?
Well, the short answer is that "removing the stigma on Klingon" is
apparently not a sufficient priority for most UTC participants for them
to bother with it. Plus, some people will worry that formally rescinding
a notice of non-approval will be viewed precisely as what you are
intending it as: a signal that the UTC is getting ready to consider
encoding Klingon. Many would prefer to just let this sit unless and
until a case could be made that Klingon actually *is* ready for encoding
(and justified and IP-unencumbered).
In any case, my advice is to stop worrying about the status in the
roadmap, and work instead on making the convincing case for encoding. I
realize that honor is of high value in Klingon society, but it doesn't
actually figure that much in UTC decisions. ;-)
>> You aren't going to find a distinction by rooting around in the
>> structure of the scripts themselves looking for objective
>> differences, nor by trying to distinguish them by details of IP
>> claims. The issues that matter are found in the social and economic
>> contexts of the encoding activities of the committees and standardizers.
> Isn't that kind of embarrassing for an organization that
> claims/aspires to some measure of cultural neutrality and support for
> minority cultures?
Hardly. It is basically a fact that character encoding is a human
activity engaged in by groups of people who are influenced by their
social and economic contexts. Failure to recognize that sometimes
flummoxes folks who don't understand why the committees make some of the
decisions they do, on occasion. But I don't see how you draw the
connection here immediately to concerns for cultural neutrality and
support for minority cultures.
More information about the Unicode