[rfc-i] RFC for a script outside of unicode, but on the web

[slevinski at signwriting.org (Steve Slevinski)]

Written sign language is possible on the web using Formal SignWriting.
This standard has been documented and stable since Jan 2012.  The standard
is used internationally at schools and universities, for projects, within
groups, and by individuals.
* http://signpuddle.com
* http://signwriting.org

Of primary note, Formal SignWriting is used for the 50+ articles in the ASL
Wikipedia and also for the 3 articles of the Tunisian Sign Language
Wikipedia, both on Wikimedia Incubator.  Several other sign language
Wikipedia projects will be starting soon.

Back in 2012, I submitted an Internet Draft to the IETF for publication as
an RFC.  For a few months it had a status of Finding Reviewers, but was
eventually changed to "No Longer In Independent Submission Stream".
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-slevinski-signwriting-text/history/

I believe it was difficult to find a reviewer for a character encoding
model of a 2-dimensional script, using cartesian coordinates.

I accepted the change and decided to expand the document and keep
resubmitting every 6 months so that it stays valid.

I have been repeatedly pointed to Unicode for script encoding, but I have
been unable to reconcile with the Unicode experts.  Long email discussion
in 2008 and 2009.  Extended disagreement with Michael Everson and Martin
Hosken in 2011.  I have even attended UTC #144 in 2015 and UTC #148  in
2016 for more discussions.

By several members of the Unicode Technical Committee, I was informed that
a character encoding model of a 2-dimensional script, using cartesian
coordinates was outside the bounds of Unicode.  I was reminded that the
"Formal SignWriting" standard can not be referenced because it is only
documented in an I-D and not an RFC.

I am preparing a new internet draft titled
"draft-slevinski-formal-signwriting" specifically focused as a technical
reference on Formal SignWriting with the details of processing and
transformation.  I will be able to reuse several sections of my existing
I-D.

Would anyone care to discuss the possibility of this new I-D submission
finding reviewers and eventual publication as an RFC?  Is there any way I
can help identify possible reviewers?  I have many more contacts now than I
did back in 2013.

Regards,
-Steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20160807/addb2a7d/attachment.html>