William_J_G Overington <wjgo underscore 10009 at btinternet dot com>
wrote:
The lack of interest has always puzzled me, I had thought that with so
many people on this mailing list who are interested in languages and
communication, including many people who have a native language other
than English, that there would be great interest in trying to produce
a useful system.
I had a similar discussion some time ago with a member of this list
regarding encoding of flags. It's an interesting idea which I think
deserves some thought, but it's not character encoding; and therefore it
doesn't belong in Unicode, or so I would have supposed.
I make no claim here about whether localizable sentences are interesting
or deserving of thought. I only explain why I, interested in language
and communication, don't believe Unicode is the proper venue for them.
Regarding your claim about valid reasons.
Could you possibly say what you consider to be the valid reasons
please?
I'm not Erkki, but what I would have said, with my old-fashioned view of
character encoding, is: because it's not character encoding.
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org
_______________________________________________
Unicode mailing list
[email protected]
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
