Archaic scripts -- the Battle of Examples

Frank Ellermann hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz at
Thu May 15 22:17:11 CEST 2008

Andrew Sullivan wrote:

> I am not convinced that this working group, or indeed the IETF
> in general, really has the broad participation of relevant
> anthropological and linguistic experts to make this kind of
> judgement.  So I don't think we should make it.

If Ken tells us that "Lo" vs. "So" means less than we might hope
for the purposes of IDNAbis wrt archaic scripts I assume that he
knows what he is talking about.  If all else fails I admire the
one PVALID Phaistos Disc symbol, folks would need the rest of
the Phaistos Disc to do anything in U-labels with it - unless
they are up to no good with corresponding A-labels.

IMO you *must* make judgement calls, it is the duty of this WG,
and I hope that folks like Michael won't let you get this wrong.

> It allows us to use a set of properties of scripts from some
> standard that does have the involvement of the athropological
> and linguistic experts needed to make the kinds of judgement
> in question (even if everyone doesn't always agree with the
> results).

Mark and Ken said that they don't populate the list of archaic
scripts with a random generator, using it should be okay.


More information about the Idna-update mailing list