Henri Sivonen wrote: > If anything, I hope this thread results in the establishment of a > requirement for proposals to come with proper research about what > multiple prominent implementations to about the subject matter of a > proposal concerning changes to text about implementation behavior.
Considering that several folks have objected that the U+FFFD recommendation is perceived as having the weight of a requirement, I think adding Henri's good advice above as a "requirement" seems heavy-handed. Who will judge how much research qualifies as "proper"? Who will determine that the judge doesn't have a conflict? An alternative would be to require that proposals, once received with whatever amount of research, are augmented with any necessary additional research *before* being approved. The identity or reputation of the requester should be irrelevant to approval. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org