<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cordia New";
panose-1:2 11 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">But, “progress” isn’t useful if it turns out to be something that nobody will ever care to implement or, worse, isn’t even technically feasible to implement, such as something that causes a spec to contradict itself.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As for your script encoding example, the fact is that no new script gets encoded into Unicode unless there _<i>is</i>_ positive endorsement from a majority of voting members (mostly big companies) of the Unicode Consortium. But since they
created Unicode to be a universal encoding, not of the big companies every block a script encoding proposal provided it is technically sound and there is evidence that the script is used within some independent user community. I can’t think of any occasion
in the past 20 years when a well-formed proposal to a new script wasn’t added to Unicode without positive endorsement from _<i>all</i>_ of the participating big companies.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Peter<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at> <b>
On Behalf Of </b>wjgo_10009@btinternet.com<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, August 20, 2020 7:49 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Updates to specification<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">Peter Constable wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">> I’d prefer to see more thumbs up on anything before adoption.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white"><br>
The problem with that is that it effectively gives a veto to progress to large companies.<br>
<br>
'If there is good opportunity to object and there are no objections then that is fine.<br>
<br>
It is like adding a script to Unicode. Those with an interest opine, others, who may never use that script but have no wish to oppose others doing so and may wish them well in their efforts, say nothing.<br>
<br>
If a new script needed positive endorsement from at least some number of big companies, the script might never get encoded.<br>
<br>
Objecting can be effective. Objections to my localizable sentences invention led to discussion of l</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">ocalizable sentences being banned in the Unicode mailing list.
So progress has been delayed. So the status quo over encoding localizable sentences into Unicode is as if it is on the lower surface of a cusp catastrophe manifold and it has quite a ceiling to breach before it becomes encoded into Unicode. It needs to be
super-excellent to overcome the objections.<br>
<br>
So I am opposed to a process where progress suggested by someone needs positive endorsement. If, given the opportunity to object, nobody objects, then, in my opinion, that is sufficient for acceptance.<br>
<br>
William Overington<br>
<br>
Thursday 20 August 2020<br>
</span><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white"><br>
<br>
</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #00ADE5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 24.0pt;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
------ Original Message ------<br>
From: "Peter Constable" <<a href="mailto:pgcon6@msn.com">pgcon6@msn.com</a>><br>
To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <<a href="mailto:Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com">Vladimir.Levantovsky@monotype.com</a>>; "David Singer" <<a href="mailto:singer@apple.com">singer@apple.com</a>><br>
Cc: "mpeg-otspec" <<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a>><br>
Sent: Wednesday, 2020 Aug 19 At 19:22<br>
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Updates to specification<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">My remarks were focused on what things look like if we try to move in the direction of more formal ISO processes, not the way we have done things via the AHG.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I have pointed out in the past and again this morning in another thread that a weakness in the current AHG process is that it’s possible for things to go into OFF without really
having had a lot of review from implementers. Not that there hasn’t been reasonable opportunity for review, but more that the engagement is passive: a proposal can be made and incorporated unless objections are raised, with silence treated as implicit consent.
But I don’t think it can really be considered consent if a proposal wasn’t actually reviewed: silence gives no indication up, down or sideways. I’d prefer to see more thumbs up on anything before adoption.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Peter<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>