Consensus Call Tranche 6 (Character Conversions)

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

I've never fully, viscerally, appreciated the complaints I heard in 
earlier instance of this adventure w.r.t. "unification".

Checking each Cree -- Nēhiyawēwin (Plains), Nēhiyawēmowin (Northern 
Plains), Nīhithawīwin (Woods ), Ininīmowin (Western Swampy), 
Ininiwi-Išikišwēwin (Eastern Swampy), Ililīmowin (Moose), Īyiyū Ayimūn 
(Coastal East) and Īnū Ayimūn (Inland East), as well as pikini kaani 
siksika (Blackfoot) has been made ever so much harder by the glyph 
catalog approach, which if memory serves (pun intended), reduced the 
size of the dump by 21%.

I'm not going to check (now) the Dene variants, or Inuktitut. I'll 
probably check Ojib-Cree,

I learned e-pe-ke-me as a kid, not consonant ordering, and I'd gladly 
pay 21% more memory to have a standard less difficult to use.

Anyway, I'll go with "YES" for 6.

Eric

Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> I'm going to check on 6.c for Cree (Carrier, Old High Siksika, etc). 
> Response by Monday or Tuesday.
>
> Vint Cerf wrote:
>   
>> Polling window closes at end of the day, October 20th (US Eastern Time)
>>
>>
>> Place your reply here: [YES]
>>
>> COMMENTS:
>>
>>
>> Procedure:
>>
>>
>> There are several decisions that the working group will need to make 
>> to confirm consensus.  I will send a series of proposals over the next 
>> two weeks requesting YES or NO positions on each within a 4 day 
>> window. If NO is the response, a reason for that position needs to be 
>> stated. If there is a clear consensus based on responses or in the 
>> absence of a consensus against each proposal, it will be assumed that 
>> the proposal is acceptable to the Working Group.
>>
>> Parenthesized symbols (e.g., "(R.1)") after the items are references 
>> to the issues lists where additional explanations can be found, as 
>> sent by John Klensin as body parts "idnabis-protocol-issues-rev3" and 
>> "idnabis-rationale-issues-03" on a message titled 'Issues lists and 
>> the "preprocessing" topic'  to the working group on 18 August 
>> (http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2008-August/002537.html)
>>
>> CONSENSUS STATEMENT:
>>
>> (6) Conversion, validation, and related issues.
>>
>> (6.a) The discussion of Unicode conversions in Section 5.2 of
>> Protocol-05 is satisfactory.   (P.7)
>>
>> (6.b) The discussion of A-label validation in Section 5.4 of
>> Protocol is satisfactory, even though it leaves considerable
>> flexibility to implementation decisions.  (P.8)
>>
>> (6.c) Labels are not permitted to start with combining marks.
>> (P.13)
>>
>> NOTE NEW BUSINESS ADDRESS AND PHONE
>> Vint Cerf
>> Google
>> 1818 Library Street, Suite 400
>> Reston, VA 20190
>> 202-370-5637
>> vint at google.com <mailto:vint at google.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idna-update mailing list
>> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
>> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>>   
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
>
>