Re: Unicode/10646 History (was Re: [idn] An ignorant question about TC<-> SC)

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>]

Ken,

If Pharonic Egyptian isn't as important as bidi and Arabic, what living
languages is it less important than?

How much time has the UTC spent on Pharonic Egyptian?
On Experanto?
On Klingon?
On Runic?
On Ogham?
On the rest of the epigraphic manias? Don't forget the time spent by the
Scripts Working Group.

Are living languages becoming extinct, or here -- CJKV stuck on some hard bit
of apparently overlooked technical work left undone?

Funny you should mention the CIRA, as I need to talk to them about languages
other than English. However, speaking simply as an individual IETF contributor,
I think the CIRA, and the UTC, may want to look into the technical requirements
for romanized forms of Cree.

What is your point about UCAS? Without Unicode, the pDAM, and real work by
Dirk (and some mistakes too, take a look at the row-column vs column-row
ordering both in Nunavut, and in Northern Cree/Siksika usage -- I learned
e-pe-ke-me as a kid, not the other way), that ... what?

Eric