Re: [Lucid] Communication.

Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net> Thu, 19 March 2015 22:59 UTC

Return-Path: <peter@andyet.net>
X-Original-To: lucid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lucid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B5961AD066 for <lucid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U-pmduqEe4Hz for <lucid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f180.google.com (mail-ie0-f180.google.com [209.85.223.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F9021A0118 for <lucid@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iecvj10 with SMTP id vj10so79820232iec.0 for <lucid@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=spCm0S2nJrb96oXrJrCas7x9n1P8jSRLrhpTnx0/tpM=; b=GEmeZTnG1TVcGWjtrTlBlMUXz1hjLHxuRQYqQGGpNxVFXVoZI5/9YBiQjn0bizXFEK Sm4otj6sbYgOFcx6IWZhijCRNvzkjxWdsVi6KNuq09p5GoNDUGoxuWX0AmhNZ2B4PcvE h6sVCfzrsAhkVCNWZ882SFPYNUI0+EgXQmmOzarb3G0LuN/xl9Do1JAlR6uXl/2irWiF etL5nLR0DMtbGlJa5n6IGFtQ9CZDND7FQi/w8amPE1CJHWxSRygkUHNuEuE+oy4RYl/3 GZXWbRG0EIkgKObVU+mjIwun2/rYn2mXANZbkBOv7GcCTW322QDtHjLm/AoLOutL32xA R+Vw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQng96rHkRScwjbEeFZqDl2cmdjGvQfmXlt7w39oioe/mX7Qu+xgS8muAmvoO1z8PNSYSG8q
X-Received: by 10.43.55.145 with SMTP id vy17mr520215icb.60.1426805964500; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aither.local (c-73-34-202-214.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [73.34.202.214]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id mw1sm277874igb.18.2015.03.19.15.59.23 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <550B54CA.1050202@andyet.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 16:59:22 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>, "lucid@ietf.org" <lucid@ietf.org>
References: <BLUPR03MB1378075831687B9D8DCE68A382010@BLUPR03MB1378.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR03MB1378075831687B9D8DCE68A382010@BLUPR03MB1378.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lucid/90wBk6v4dUzvnfATAESRS-TUmVE>
Subject: Re: [Lucid] Communication.
X-BeenThere: lucid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Locale-free UniCode Identifiers \(LUCID\)" <lucid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lucid>, <mailto:lucid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lucid/>
List-Post: <mailto:lucid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lucid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lucid>, <mailto:lucid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 22:59:26 -0000

On 3/19/15 4:37 PM, Shawn Steele wrote:
> I feel like I'm speaking a different language, or at least not
> worrying about the same problems.
>
> Andrew keeps asking, I've read
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-lucid-prob-stmt/?include_text=1
> several times now...
>
> It looks like the PRECIS effort and Unicode aren't speaking the same
> language.  Which is unfortunate, since PRECIS is attempting to
> suggest ways to use Unicode.
>
> I think Asmus said that well " Character encoding is not the process
> of numbering entities by shape. It's the process of numbering
> entities by their underlying identity in writing."
>
> The PRECIS effort's language is all about characters are encoded by
> shape.  Unicodes language defined them as being encoded by their
> underlying identity.

Really? Now I need to ask if you have read draft-ietf-precis-framework:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-framework/

Just as with IDNA2008, we structured PRECIS so that decisions are made 
algorithmically based on the properties of code points (which together 
constitute the code point's identity), not the shapes of glyphs.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://andyet.com/