I do think such a service would be good, to provide the same open discussion forum/bug reporting/testing ground for ISO 3166 [...]
Except, of course, that the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency is not a Registration Authority, but a Maintenance Agency. Its codes are assigned when the United Nations informs it that a code needs to be assigned. It would seem that a discussion list for ISO 3166 would therefore be of little use.
(Some Irish lists, as you may know, were recently mercilessly dive-bombed with msgs in English, trying to disrupt debates in Irish about a lang-tag problem which also surfaced on the IANA and Unicode lists.)
The "merciless dive-bombing" you refer to is obviously the necessary defence *I* had to mount against the alarmist hullabaloo which did not "surface", but which was raised needlessly by *you* on the IETF Language Tag list, the Unicode list, and various Irish lists, regarding text which you disliked in some of Apple's software that supports Irish cultural locales. Pooh-poohing that defence because it was in the English language is a poor rhetorical device at best, as is your continued avoidance of the use of my name in attacks such as the one you have made here.
The fact that the "lang-tag problem" had nothing whatsoever to do with language tags is known to more than a fair few of the readers of the lists that your "campaign" was visited upon. It is you, Marion, who dive-bombed the IETF and Unicode lists with blather about the "anticonstitutionality" of Apple's software; it is you who incited letter-writing campaigns -- which amounted to a form of chain-mail spam -- to the irritation of many people associated with Apple, NSAI, and other organizations. It is you who wasted the time of Ireland's *government* by raising the issue to a Parliamentary Question, and it is you who are now scurrying to reinsert yourself into the standards process simply because you're not happy with the answer that you got to that Question.
(The Minister who responded praised Apple for looking after Ireland's cultural interests, and acknowledged that, while the terminology question was not a standardization matter, Apple had asked NSAI's committee on Codes, Character Sets, and Internationalization -- which I convene -- for advice on the "controversy". This advice has been given, and Apple has thanked the committee for its input. What Apple chooses to do with the advice is -- as the Minister rightly pointed out -- Apple's business, and I look forward to finding out in due course when Apple releases its next version of OS X.)
Oftentimes, I feel the Unicode list, or some of its members, to be approachable/helpful/appreciative in areas to do with character sets/groupings and cultural codetags, and how the bits and pieces get cobbled together, for good or ill, to make up locales.
The Unicode list is full of participants who are, indeed, approachable, helpful,and appreciative of expertise regarding characters and character sets. What is a "character grouping" meant to refer to? You seem to be in a complete muddle about the difference between tags and codes and text. (What is a "cultural codetag"? You really oughtn't make things up as you go along.) You've certainly confused the codes for languages, countries, and airlines, and the function of this list and other lists with regard to internationalization.
At other times, I feel like I just stumbled into a YMCA when its inmates are restive/want a common enemy (that's when I bring to mind the 3 children - or, yea, a Daniel! - and go do it anyway).
(This is certainly a remarkable piece of prose.)
As a rhetorical device, whining isn't very attractive. You have, in my view at least, behaved unprofessionally and offensively, making thinly-veiled attacks on me and my work, on discussion forums where I have, it seems, a good deal of credibility. You've been told to knock it off by people who have less patience than I. Pretending to be the innocent victim because you don't like the criticism you received doesn't fool anyone, any more than bad-mouthing me without using my name does.
For my part, I am rather tired of playing games like this with you. Frankly, it seems to me that what expertise "EGT" had in Unicode matters left the "company" when the Everson left it. The fact that you *continue* to maintain my former e-mail addresses [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED], and that you are known to have read mail sent to *me* at both of those addresses, seems to me to be the height of unprofessional and indeed deceitful practice. There has been no Everson at "EGT" for more than eighteen months. Isn't it odd that you won't acknowledge my existence on the Unicode and IETF lists, yet you continue to breach my privacy by reading my mail? As I have said to you many times, you should ring your ISP and discontinue the addresses immediately and permanently. You've no business using my name. You should be ashamed of yourself for doing so.
(Readers of these lists should be particularly careful not to write to me at either of those addresses, as sometimes occurs due to the presence of that address in archived online documents.)
I'm not particularly happy about having to insert discussion of personal matters into our technical discussions. But I don't think it's right to ignore such issues when clearly they are the primary cause of unpleasantness on our discussion forums. Perhaps being forthright about the facts is better than pretending that there isn't a problem. I should certainly like to see the end of this.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
