Hello Mirjana, I am really distressed that, in Monday’smeeting, you seemed to be saying that everybody who made a substantive commentabout our draft report was characterizing our work as “rubbish.” I do not, repeat NOT, think our work wasrubbish. And I do not believe that theother commenters do either. The Latin script is an enormous mess, require several ordersof magnitude more effort to address than the task faced by any other scriptGP. We have all worked hard, for manyyears, to deal with it. And most of ourwork has been, in my opinion, quite good. Anyone who follows us will inevitably workfrom the base we have created. Obviously I think we have made some incorrect decisions on acouple of points. But that is a far cryfrom disparaging the whole thing, or suggesting that it be thrown out entirely. For example, consider the matter of variants. Since you and Michael are adamantly opposedto making changes to the threshold we used here, I am aware that it isn’t goingto happen. But suppose, hypothetically, that we were to changethe threshold from 5 of 7 members to 3, or even 1 member finding a pair ofglyphs to be indistinguishable. Wouldall the work need to be redone? Clearlynot. We have in hand the ratingspreadsheets that we used, and there would be no need to redo those. All that would be required is to go thru andlook at how many of us rated a particular pair 1 or 2. That isn’t something that requires a lot ofexpertise or a lot of work. It is,frankly, a clerical task. A low levelclerical task. I hope you can review the comments we got, and come to see thatnobody is disparaging our work. Theymerely have some thoughts about how it could be done better. We may disagree with their suggestions. (I know I disagree with some of them.) But that's all. Warmest regards, Bill