2012/6/3 Doug Ewell <[email protected]>: > Read http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3727.pdf . This mechanism is > part of Unicode, and adding another one such as Philippe's to accomplish > basically the same thing would be a form of duplicate encoding.
First I have NEVER advocated using flags for identifying languages. This is a common practie but something I strongly disapprove. Next This is not "duplicate encoding". Given that there's no such first encoding of national flags as characters. Yes this may mean that some people will try to use those flags as language indicators. But this will remain wrong. My intent is just to allow encoding flags for what they are : flags. Nothing else, not even with their intended territory coverage (even if we can admit their semantics according to ISO 3166 territorial coverages). MY initent is JUST to solve both the political and legal/copyright issues, but as well offer a clear path for interoperability at the plain text level, without requiring embeddded images (not stable is using URLs, legally restricted in terms of copright and political issues. The need for an interoperable solution is demonstrated in extrmeely frequent cases (so many that it is impossible to list an exhautive list of them). The issue of interoperability occurs very frequently. The current basic solutions (implemented in standards) are completely unable to solve the problem (embedded URLS or images are definitely not portable as there's no way to identify them with flags for any specific country, beven that both solutions are not used according so any standard and do not make any difference with any random images or even with advertizing inserts, that only a human can solve). Also I certainly don't want to let the UTC introduce directly flags for any specific regions. This would be another nightmare (just like the current "ideographic" nightmare that was adopted early, just because emergency needs, but without any research and development made to help close this issue for the long term) And if you want my opinion about the alternate proposal for "regional indocators" I don't support them for exactly the same reason as language indicators: their application scope also in an undetermined and arbitrary length of texts.. Flags are definitely not duplicates of regional indicators, their scope is limited to the occurence of the flag itself, wihout any consequence on how to interpret the rest of the text. My proposal is just "symbols", not "indicators" that I strongly do not approve.
