Dear colleagues, It occurs to me that there may be some question about how much time it would take to expand the repertoire as I have advocated. So let me offer an estimate. I believe we already have (somewhere) a list of all of the languages using the Latin script. To use that to produce: - a table of code points to be added (including name, glyph, Unicode number and languages which use it). - a list of which of the new languages use the code points already in the repertoire. (In case we wish to update our existing repertoire tables to include them. Which we may or may not.) - a list of references (probably the usual omniglot links) for each of the additional languages I expect would take approximately 2 weeks. IF I do it entirely myself. This based on how long it was taking me to work thru a language when we did the original repertoire, once I got the hang of it. Beyond that, a few days to identify potential variants of the new code points, and a week for us all to do our individual evaluations. And, once that is done, a day to determine which pairs achieved the threshold (whether our existing one or a new one). Not, I think, an enormous elongation of our timeline. Regards Bill On Thursday, November 18, 2021, 12:25:45 AM PST, Michael Bauland via Latingp <latingp@icann.org> wrote: Good morning Bill, On 17.11.2021 19:50, Bill Jouris via Latingp wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I have drafted a Minority Report. Per Sarmad's guidance, I have submitted it as a Public Comment. But for those who don't wish to dig it our from there, a copy is attached here.
thank you for the minority report. It is always good to make voices heard that would otherwise be overlooked or forgotten. Regarding your point about the languages we may have overlooked I have to admit that I lack knowledge to make a opinionated decision. We might need to discuss this further and possibly (at least for myself) need to gather further information. Regarding variants, while your examples and arguments are correct in that these letters/labels are very easily confusable for a large portion of the internet users, I disagree that they should be considered variants. The rules of which characters may be considered variants are quite strict and they are not about simple confusion. The fact that there are confusable labels, as in your example .сом and .COM, will be the task of the similarity review team. I'm certain that .сом would not pass the similarity review and would be rejected on grounds of being confusable with .COM (or rather .com). I think it's a good decision to keep the variant relationships restricted to clear-cut cases and not include merely confusables. If all confusables would be in a variant set, due to transitivity, I'm afraid we'd have characters being variants (and thus blocking each other) that are far from being similar. I wouldn't be surprised if that even leads to a situation in which "a", "o", "q", "p", and "g" are all being considered variants of each other. Anyway, that's just my opinion. We should talk about this in the group. Cheers, Michael -- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | knipp | Knipp Medien und Kommunikation GmbH ------- Technologiepark Martin-Schmeisser-Weg 9 44227 Dortmund Germany Dipl.-Informatiker Fon: +49 231 9703-0 Fax: +49 231 9703-200 Dr. Michael Bauland SIP: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Software Development E-mail: Michael.Bauland@knipp.de Register Court: Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 13728 Chief Executive Officers: Dietmar Knipp, Elmar Knipp _______________________________________________ Latingp mailing list Latingp@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.