Hi IETF list,
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign language as data.
I've worked directly with the inventor of the script, which is over 30
years old.
We are ready to standardize. The latest symbol was finalized last month
after more than a year of improvements and refining.
Hi -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 10:50 AM
Subject: Advice on publishing open standards
...
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign language as data.
I've worked directly with the inventor of the script, which is over 30
years
--On Friday, 28 November, 2008 11:02 -0800 Randy Presuhn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 10:50 AM
Subject: Advice on publishing open standards
...
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign
language
.
Regards,
-Steve
Hi -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 10:50 AM
Subject: Advice on publishing open standards
...
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign language as
data.
I've worked directly with the inventor of the script, which
,
-Steve
Hi -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 10:50 AM
Subject: Advice on publishing open standards
...
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign language as
data.
I've worked directly with the inventor of the script, which is over 30
slevin at signpuddle dot net wrote:
First, Unicode is written in stone.
A gross overgeneralization. Unicode characters are not allowed to be
moved or renamed once they have been encoded. New characters can always
be added, though.
Our latest symbol set may be our last, but maybe not.
: Advice on publishing open standards
...
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign language as
data.
I've worked directly with the inventor of the script, which is over 30
years old.
We are ready to standardize. The latest symbol was finalized last
month
after more than
Our latest symbol set may be our last, but maybe not. In 2 or 3
years, we may update our symbol set. This would cause problems
because Unicode is not allowed to change.
How good an idea is it to attempt to standardize a character encoding in
which it is expected that characters might still
You would face two problems with the IETF. One is that we
rarely take on work for which we cannot add value and do
effective reviews. The other is that we generally don't do work
that is not Internet-specific, and your audience would seem much
broader that the Internet alone. Terms like
One note about the charset name. The registered name would be
charset=iswa-2008, *not* charset=x-iswa-2008. The x- prefix should
only be used for experimenting until the name is registered. Per RFC
2978, section 3.1, x- prefix can only be used *until* the registration
is complete. You should also
For the past 5 years, I've been processing written sign
language as data.
I've worked directly with the inventor of the script, which
is over 30 years old.
We are ready to standardize. The latest symbol was finalized
last month after more than a year of improvements and refining.
I
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:28:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Second, Unicode is used with sequential scripts: one character after
another. Our script is spatial: the words are characters written in space
based on coordinates. The words are sequential, but not the characters.
Even if we
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi -
There are several issues with Unicode.
Many of the world's standards organizations, including the IETF to
some degree, have more or less outsourced issues of character
definition and specification to Unicode. Were your writing
--On Friday, November 28, 2008 4:20 PM -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You would face two problems with the IETF. One is that we
rarely take on work for which we cannot add value and do
effective reviews. The other is that we generally don't do
work that is not Internet-specific, and your
14 matches
Mail list logo
