Re: [I18ndir] [art] New Version Notification for draft-bray-unichars-06.txt

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Oct 1, 2023 at 10:56 AM Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 2023-10-01, at 19:44, Tim Bray <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > I repeat: To inform protocol designers that it’s insufficient to say
> “Unicode characters” for their text fields. And, having explained why,
> offer reasonable alternative character repertoires.
>
> That is approximately the reason why I wrote modern-network-unicode.
> Please explain how draft-bray-unichars is more useful for this purpose.
>

There are a bunch of problems with that modern-network-unicode and your
rhetoric here. Firstly, you're talking your own book. It's your draft, and
you're presenting it as somehow in opposition to the draft we're talking
about. It's not. The unichars document in question doesn't make any
requirements.

Secondly, I know less about Unicode than the draft-bray-unichars authors,
Asmus, you, and James, but I still know more than almost anyone on Earth. I
do not understand your document's purpose, even though I understand every
sentence individually.

Thirdly, it's called "Modern", which is always a red flag. When a document
appeals to propriety with terms like "Modern" or "Proper", it just sounds
like unrealistic authoritarianism to me.

Lastly, we can go right to the way the IETF works: "rough consensus and
running code". I don't like everything in the document, in the sense that
it tries to make rules a little bit, but it sure does describe running
code. Good enough, ship it.

thanks,
Rob