Consensus Call Tranche 8 (Character Adjustments)

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

> I confess that I share Patrik's concern for disregarding a consensus 
> process from a specific language expert group.

Of necessity, any specific language expert(s) are going to be a (small) 
minority of an IETF WG, which is where "rough consensus" can fail to 
produce an outcome which incorporates the contributions of the specific 
language expert(s).

It happened in 2002/3, different chair(s), but its not just the chair(s) 
who hum. I'm still concerned that the Arabic Script meeting at ICANN 
Paris yielded information from the Jawi user community which was 
dismissed out of hand here. I don't think distance from Minneapolis or 
Dublin really makes a poorer technical argument than proximity.

It is something of an inherent defect that our "consensus" can mean 
meeting-centricism, where "meeting" takes on values somewhere along the 
Goonhilly-ISI arc. Our problem space is slightly larger.

Ironically, in 200X, X << 8, it was Koreans who wanted Cherokee banned 
(similarity to ASCII). Fortunately the more popular position did not 
then prevail.

Eric