Difference between Klingon and Tengwar

[Ken Whistler]

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 is no longer valid, why refuse to rescind it?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.

--Ken