On 18/01/2019 19:02, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
On 1/18/2019 7:27 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
....I understand only better why a significant majority of UTC is hating French.
Francophobia is also palpable in Canada, beyond any technical reasons,
especially in the IT industry. Hence the position of UTC is far from isolated.
If ethic and personal considerations inflect decision-making, they should
consistently be an integral part of discussions here. In that vein, I’d mention
that by the time when Unicode was developed, there was a global hatred against
France, that originated in French colonial and foreign politics since WWII, and
was revived a few years ago by the French government sinking 𝑅𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑏𝑜𝑤 𝑊𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟
and killing the crew’s photographer, in the port of Auckland. That crime
triggered a peak of anger.
Again, my recollections do *not support* any issues of _Francophobia_.
The Unicode Technical committee has always had French people on board, from the
beginning, and I have witnessed no issues where they took up a different
technical position based on language. Quite the opposite, the UTC generally
appreciates when someone can provide native insights into the requirements for
supporting a given language. How best to realize these requirements then
becomes a joint effort.
If anything, the Unicode Consortium saw itself from the beginning in contrast
to an IT culture for which internationalization at times was still something of
an afterthought.
Given all that, I find your suggestions and implications deeply hurtful and
hope you will find a way to avoid a repetition in the future.
May I suggest that trying to rake over the past and apportion blame is
generally less productive than _moving forward _and addressing the outstanding
problems.
It is my last-resort track that I’m deeply convinced of. But I’m thankfully
eased by not needing to discuss it here further.
To point a well-founded behavior is not to blame. You’ll note that I carefully
founded how UTC was right in doing so if they did. I wasn’t aware that I was
hurtful. You tell me, so I apologize. Please note, though, based on my past
e‑mail, that I see UTC as a compound of multiple, sometimes antagonistic
tendencies. Just an example to help understand what I mean: When Karl Pentzlin
proposed to encode a missing French abbreviation indicator, a typographer was
directed to argue (on behalf of his employer IIUC) that this would be a case of
encoding all scripts in bold and italic. The OP protested that it wasn’t, but
he was overheard. That example raises much concern, the more as we were told on
this List that decision makers in UTC are refusing to join in open and public
discussions here, are only “duelling ballot comments.”
Now since regardless of being right in doing so, they did not at all, I’m
plunged again into disarray. May I quote Germaine Tillion, a French ethnologue:
It’s important to understand what happens to us; to understand is to exist. ―
Originally, “to exist” meant “to stand out.” That is still somewhat implied in
the strong sense of “to exist.” Understanding does also help to overcome.
That’s why I wrote one e‑mail before:
Nothing happens, or does not happen, without a good reason.
Finding out what reason is key to recoverage.
If we want to get what we need, we must do our homework first.
Thanks for helping bring it to the point.
Kind regards,
Marcel
