Sorry about this error, "The Unicode.org website page copy that I quoted is not factual" and similar. I should clarify here, not that my gleaning and copy/pasting quotation from the Unicode.org website home page is unfactual, the Unicode.org content itself from their website home page is unfactual. Regards Meeku http://twitter.com/nepotism --- On Sun, 2/11/08, Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Unicode.org Software Internationalisation Standards &Specification > To: linuxalinux@xxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx, john-ietf@xxxxxxx > Date: Sunday, 2 November, 2008, 2:08 PM > This all smells bad. > > regards > joe baptista > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 8:48 AM, linuxa linux > <linuxalinux@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote: > > > Doug, Thanks for your response that shows your > knowledge and expertise > > about internet / computer things, common sense, > organisational topics and > > also the replacing k/K to unicode 0915 glyph shape > issue. > > > > "........You might as well send your message to > your MP or to the Queen, > > for all the good it will do to send it to IETF." > > > > Airing the issue to the internet / computer community. > > > > > > "I don't speak for their mailing-list > administrator........." > > > > The Unicode.org website home page copy that I quoted > is not factual. > > > > > > "Accusing an organization of process failure and > insensitivity and > > stubbornness is not usually a productive way to get > them to come around to > > your point of view." > > > > The Unicode.org website page copy that I quoted is not > factual. > > > > > > "You have stipulated that this > constitutes........" > > > > The Unicode.org website page copy that I quoted is not > factual. There > > should be some limitations. They don't have a > demo that proves the first > > quote and the Unicode.org is not a framework. > > > > > > ".......You are accusing Unicode of things it is > not responsible for. This > > is like blaming the weatherman when it rains." > > > > The Unicode.org website page copy that I quoted is not > factual. There > > should be some limitations. They should clarify what > they are not > > responsible for. Their home page copy that I quoted > is a trap for > > Unicode.org and readers. > > > > > > "You are trying to change the basic form of a > letter that has existed in > > the Latin alphabet for over two thousand years, on the > basis of an > > association between the K glyph and the intersection > of three rivers, > > derived loosely from a secondary Krishna text. > ["that the letter K > > represents suicide and needs to be changed"] You > are trying to change the > > basic form of a letter recognized by billions of > people, and one of your > > first moves is to approach an international > standards-making organization, > > which does NOT standardize the Latin alphabet itself > and is NOT in the > > business of deciding what letters are supposed to look > like, and accuse them > > of improper conduct because they do not immediately > modify their charts and > > develop new fonts based on your views, which so far I > have only heard from > > ONE person. To say you are outside the mainstream > would be a serious > > understatement." > > > > The latin / roman k/K letter needs to be replaced to > another shape for > > reasons you know. You have to understand that issue > is beyond > > organisational management because it is related to > human life. Approaching > > Unicode.org and IETF.org was essential because they > claim to have various > > controls over internet / computer transmitted > language. Some helpful > > interim things should be put in place, leadership and > management is much > > needed. Unicode.org website home page communicates > the wrong impression and > > they should correct that. > > > > > > "Style of what?....Content of what? The standard > is described in > > excruciating detail at > http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.1.0/......Unicode > doesn't tell people how to design user interfaces. That > is > > completely up to application developers, as it should > be.....See > > http://www.unicode.org/consortium/join.html > .....Unicode doesn't tell > > people how to build applications, whether open-source > or proprietary. Do > > you feel it should?" > > > > Thus Unicode.org has not any framework. Certain > programmers thus become > > baffled. The Unicode.org home page copy that I quoted > is not factual. > > There should be some limitations. > > > > > > "It does not say that it will take you by the > hand and show you how to > > program, configure, or use a computer in any > language." > > > > Unicode.org are unjustly saying things on the website > home page copy that I > > quoted, they are not communicating there what they are > not responsible for. > > They are leaving this to other imaginations and > trapping themselves and > > others. > > > > > > "Unicode makes it possible to put tens of > thousands of different characters > > on a .....a plain-text document" > > > > I refer to .txt files, are you also suggesting that > you can put save a .txt > > file on the computer that has unicode 0915 glyph > shape? > > > > > > "What sort of "framework" are you > looking for to accomplish your goals? Be > > specific, please, for once." > > > > I was being specific that there is not any framework > about Style, Content, > > User Interface, Membership and Extensions, these > generic areas that can help > > Software Internationalisation otherwise certain > programmers would not get > > baffled for example at particular opensource code > applications when they are > > asked to remove all k/K letters and replace them with > unicode 0915 glyph > > shape. There should be some catch-all process / > principle at header and > > footer of a code for example BBCode / HTML has this > and this principle > > perhaps should be considered to ease the burden. I am > not a coder / > > programmer thus I am not sure whether this way is > possible. > > > > > > "......It can *only* mean granting of favors, > such as employment or > > political status, to personal relatives regardless of > their qualifications. > > You can say "corporate nepotism" if you > like and English speakers will > > automatically interpret this as "someone in a > corporation was made > > vice-president because he was someone else's > brother, not because he > > deserved it." Nobody will interpret this as > "collusion between > > corporations" or "unfair bias." You > need to pick another word that really > > means what you want it to mean. Nobody can stop you > from misusing this word > > if you insist, but they are within their rights to > laugh and ignore you." > > > > I saw the Wikipedia "nepotism" meaning and > it includes "friends" not only > > "relatives." Thus "nepotism" is a > problem at organisational and corporate > > networks. This includes Unicode.org and IETF.org. > Leadership and > > management are required to prevent this. > > > > > > "When the day comes when you convince a > SIGNIFICANT number of Latin-script > > users, worldwide, that the letter K represents suicide > and needs to be > > changed, THEN it is time to approach the standards > organizations > > *respectfully* and ask them to make changes that > reflect a change that a > > SIGNIFICANT number of people have already adopted. It > needs to be something > > people see in newspapers and on street signs and on > television. Until then, > > this effort will not be seen constructively." > > > > I repeat.....The latin / roman k/K letter needs to be > replaced to another > > shape for reasons you know. You have to understand > that issue is beyond > > organisational management because it is related to > human life. Approaching > > Unicode.org and IETF.org was essential because they > claim to have various > > controls over internet / computer transmitted > language. Some helpful > > interim things should be put in place, leadership and > management is much > > needed. Unicode.org website home page communicates > the wrong impression and > > they should correct that. > > > > > > John, Thanks for your response. > > > > Unicode.org don't want to listen anymore when it > relates to their website > > home page because they blocked my message to the > mailing list that was > > critical about this. Unicode.org should say > categorically they are not > > responsible for framework. However they are > communicating the wrong > > impression to the internet / computer community. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Meeku > > http://twitter.com/nepotism > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf mailing list > > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > > > -- > Joe Baptista > www.publicroot.org > PublicRoot Consortium > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, > Representative & > Accountable to the Internet community @large. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) > Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf