On 6/10/15, Anshuman Pandey <[email protected]> wrote: > I learned today that the WG2 document register is not publicly > accessible.
Seems that the page http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/ or the repo it points to ftp://std.dkuug.dk/ftp.anonymous/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/ haven't been updated after 2014-10-29. At least there should be a notice saying this is no longer the active register, if this is being maintained for historical purposes! > This means that I, as a proposal author, have no means of > accessing the documents that I contribute. But why would you want to do that? I suppose everyone who submits Unicode proposals would have their own copies of their documents, and certainly the ISO doesn't modify the contents of any of these documents. > I've already started to add copyright statements to my proposals. Now I'll > add another statement that says: "This document is intended for encoding > the XYZ script in The Unicode Standard. If it and its contents are > appropriated for encoding XYZ in ISO 10646, then ISO must make this document > openly and publicly accessible to all." Hm -- I'd be interested to see how they respond. Re your wording: 1) "appropriated"? 2) Unicode and ISO 10646 are only nominally two different standards and effectively (i.e. apart from all those procedural details) the same, no? Now does the UTC still require us proposal authors to forward our docs to WG2 after UTC approval? I fail to see the point in that if whatever is part of Unicode is going to become part of ISO 10646, except for that if by closing its doors to proposal authors, the ISO is going to communicate only with the UTC, then the UTC would have to take upon itself the onus of forwarding all proposals to the ISO saying -- I'm sure the UTC doesn't want that. -- Shriramana Sharma ஶ்ரீரமணஶர்மா श्रीरमणशर्मा
