Attn: Unicode Inc worker Peter Zilahy Ingerman, PhD
C/o Magda Danish
Sr Administrative Director
Unicode Inc
<pzi @ ingerman.org>,
<v-magdad @ microsoft.com>,
Neither Assam Government nor Assam Literary Society has asked Unicode
Inc to encode Assamese stuff.
Why did Unicode Inc encode Assamese stuff?
Can you reply back with detailed information on what prompt Unicode
Inc to encode Assamese stuff as "Bengali"?
Thank you in advance for providing this information,
Tulasi
PS: Your email thread appended herewith as reference
From: Peter Zilahy Ingerman, PhD <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:27 AM
Subject: Re: Continue: Glaring Mistake in the Code List of South Asian
Script, Reply to Daug Ewell and Others
To: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Truly, a fanatic redoubles his efforts when he loses sight of his
goal.
Peter Ingerman
On 2011-09-12 07:21, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
On 09/12/2011 06:01 AM, delex r wrote:
Anyone who is not aware of fact and want to find out in
unicode about Assamese Raw (09F1) or Assamese Wa(09F1) will find it
absurd and difficult as if he is being asked to find out London in the
map of Germany.
See above. You're absolutely, 100% right, and you obviously have
seen something we've all missed. (Actually, I don't know whether you
are or not, but let's assume you are). Thank you for pointing out
this glaring mistake in Unicode's naming. This glaring mistake will
remain a glaring mistake, just like the spelling of "BRAKCET" instead
of "bracket" will remain in U+FE18.
You're totally right in everything you have said (we'll assume).
No need to try to convince us anymore, we believe you. No names will
be changed, anyway.
~mark
