On 11/03/18 21:05, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 07:35:11PM +0100, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> > I fail to understand why increasing complexity decreases the need to be 
> > widely understood.
> I’m pretty sure that everybody will agree that the need gets all the
> greater as Unicode and connected technologies get more complex. But you
> can hopefully see that the cost also increases, and that’s incentive
> enough to refrain from doing it – as it already was very costly fifteen
> years ago, it’s likely to be prohibitive today.
> > Recurrent threads show how slowly Unicode education 
> > is spreading among English native speakers; others incidentally complained 
> > about Unicode‐educational issues in African countries. *Not* translating 
> > the Standard — in whatever way — wonʼt help steepen the curve.
> Nobody is saying “let’s not translate the Unicode Standard”; what
> several people here have pointed out is that it pays to have more modest
> and manageable goals. Besides, you’re hinting yourself that the
> problems are not only with translation, since they also affect native
> English speakers.

Indeed, to be fair. And for implementers, documenting themselves in English 
may scarcely ever have much of a problem, no matter whatʼs the locale.

Todayʼs policy is, that we are welcome to browse Wikipedia:


Fundamentally thatʼs true (although the wording could use some fixes as of 
the difference between *using* Unicode and *documenting* Unicode), and
itʼs consistent with actual trends.

As of the cost — It still seems to me that weʼre far from the last word…

Best regards,


Reply via email to