Re: Seeming hostility to conlang scripts?
Vikki McDonough via Unicode <[email protected]> Wed, 27 May 2026 08:56:45 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.unicode.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAPwTRx_i+5Li0obRkSGhEKdtdpAie8fOvr19GO4D8FN8PzeKAQ@mail.gmail.com> |
--00000000000010cd960652ccfc31 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wait - if Sarati was never actually the subject of an encoding proposal, how did it get Not the Roadmap-ed? - Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F On Tue, May 26, 2026, 6:26=E2=80=AFPM Rebecca Bettencourt <beckiergb@gmail.= com> wrote: > I don't know about Sarati. It's likely still small enough that Unicode > doesn't consider it notable or to have a large enough community. Also I'm > not aware of any recent proposals submitted for it. Unicode seems > uninterested in removing anything from the Not The Roadmap unless it is > close to actually being encoded, lest it create a false impression. > > -- Rebecca Bettencourt > > > On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 4:03=E2=80=AFPM Vikki McDonough <shahmaat123@gmai= l.com> > wrote: > >> Sarati (which dates from the 1910s) has *also* passed into the public >> domain, though, and yet *it*'s still on the Not the Roadmap wall of sham= e. >> >> >> - Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2026, 5:58=E2=80=AFPM Rebecca Bettencourt <beckiergb@gma= il.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Often those scripts have already passed into the public domain, have >>> been released into the public domain by their creators, or their creato= rs >>> have explicitly given their permission to encode them. >>> >>> -- Rebecca Bettencourt >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 3:53=E2=80=AFPM Vikki McDonough <shahmaat123@gm= ail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> If a script could be copyrighted, wouldn't that preclude the encoding >>>> of *any* script created in the last century or so (N'Ko, Osage, Adlam, >>>> Nyiakeng Puachue Hmong, SignWriting, Garay, Shavian...)? >>>> >>>> >>>> - Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 26, 2026, 5:32=E2=80=AFPM Rebecca Bettencourt <beckiergb@g= mail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Unicode's "hostility" to conlang scripts has actually been >>>>> *decreasing* over the years. Such proposals used to be rejected outri= ght >>>>> for not being notable or not having a large enough user community. Th= at is >>>>> not the case anymore. Klingon, Sitelen Pona, Tengwar, and Cirth have = all >>>>> actually been recognized as having a large enough user community; the >>>>> objections being raised now are actually much more complicated issues= to >>>>> navigate: copyright status and stability. >>>>> >>>>> Unicode does not want to include Klingon without a letter from >>>>> Paramount's legal department stating that they will not sue anyone wh= o >>>>> implements it, but Paramount simply does not care enough to spend leg= al >>>>> resources on that. Tengwar and Cirth are in the hands of the Tolkien >>>>> estate, which is extremely controlling about the use of their intelle= ctual >>>>> property and is not going to give permission to encode them. And whil= e it's >>>>> legally questionable whether a writing system can actually be copyrig= hted, >>>>> Unicode does not have the resources to find out. >>>>> >>>>> As for Sitelen Pona, it is still relatively new and unstable: people >>>>> are still experimenting with new features, new characters, and new gl= yph >>>>> variants, and the people who came together to write the most recent >>>>> preliminary proposal are still stuck in constant arguments over which >>>>> characters to propose. Unicode actually ran into concerns about stabi= lity a >>>>> few years ago when they needed to update the representative glyphs fo= r >>>>> Adlam because it had changed slightly since it was encoded. Unicode d= oesn't >>>>> want to have to update a script every year. >>>>> >>>>> Most recently, the UTC in its most recent meeting actually had a >>>>> discussion on how to support newly-created scripts. They suggested th= at the >>>>> Script Encoding Working Group and the Script Encoding Initiative work >>>>> together to develop "support for neoscripts" using "software packages= " that >>>>> can override character properties for Private Use Area characters. Wh= ether >>>>> this will actually happen I have doubts, and it's likely more for the= sake >>>>> of minority languages than conlangs, but it's still a positive sign. >>>>> >>>>> -- Rebecca Bettencourt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 2:09=E2=80=AFPM Vikki McDonough via Unicode < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hai all! >>>>>> >>>>>> No offense meant to anyone personally, but why does Unicode seem to >>>>>> be biased against scripts devised for conlangs? To the best of my >>>>>> knowledge, *every single time* such a script's been proposed for >>>>>> inclusion, it's ultimately been rejected (albeit with different leve= ls of >>>>>> vehemence - Klingon and Sarati both ended up on the Not the Roadmap = hall of >>>>>> shame [Klingon from each of *two separate* proposals], Sitelen Pona >>>>>> was merely rejected, and Tengwar and Corth actually made it into the >>>>>> roadmap to the SMP only to languish there for years before eventuall= y being >>>>>> removed earlier this spring), even for those (like Klingon) with an = active >>>>>> user base considerably larger than those of some obscure natural-lan= guage >>>>>> scripts that *do* get encoded. (In contrast, conlangs that use an >>>>>> existing script do *occasionally* get their language-specific >>>>>> letters encoded, such as the Volap=C3=BCk-specific Latin letters alr= eady >>>>>> published in Unicode.) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F >>>>>> >>>>> --00000000000010cd960652ccfc31 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"auto"><div>Wait - if Sarati was never actually the subject of a= n encoding proposal, how did it get Not the Roadmap-ed?</div><div><br></div= ><div data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div>- = Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F</div></div= ></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr= " class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, May 26, 2026, 6:26=E2=80=AFPM Rebecca Betten= court <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>>= ; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .= 8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I do= n't know about Sarati. It's likely still small enough that Unicode = doesn't consider it notable or to have a large enough community. Also I= 'm not aware of any recent proposals submitted for it. Unicode seems un= interested in removing anything from the Not The Roadmap unless it is close= to actually being encoded, lest it create a false impression.</div><div><d= iv dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"= ><br>-- Rebecca Bettencourt</div></div><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_qu= ote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 4:03=E2= =80=AFPM Vikki McDonough <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" targe= t=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></d= iv><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;bord= er-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><div= >Sarati (which dates from the 1910s) has *also* passed into the public doma= in, though, and yet *it*'s still on the Not the Roadmap wall of shame.<= /div><div><br></div><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div>- Vikki McDonough = =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F</div></div></div><br><div = class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, May 26,= 2026, 5:58=E2=80=AFPM Rebecca Bettencourt <<a href=3D"mailto:beckiergb@= gmail.com" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">[email protected]</a>>= wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px = 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir= =3D"ltr"><div>Often those scripts have already passed into the public domai= n, have been released into the public domain by their creators, or their cr= eators have explicitly given their permission to encode them.</div><div><di= v dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature"><br>-- Rebecca Bettencourt</div></d= iv><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail= _attr">On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 3:53=E2=80=AFPM Vikki McDonough <<a href= =3D"mailto:[email protected]" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_= blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"g= mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204= ,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>If a script could be cop= yrighted, wouldn't that preclude the encoding of *any* script created i= n the last century or so (N'Ko, Osage, Adlam, Nyiakeng Puachue Hmong, S= ignWriting, Garay, Shavian...)?</div><div><br></div><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><= div><br></div>- Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D=E2=9A=A7=EF= =B8=8F</div></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" cla= ss=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, May 26, 2026, 5:32=E2=80=AFPM Rebecca Bettencourt= <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" t= arget=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote cl= ass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid= rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Unicode's &qu= ot;hostility" to conlang scripts has actually been *decreasing* over t= he years. Such proposals used to be rejected outright for not being notable= or not having a large enough user community. That is not the case anymore.= Klingon, Sitelen Pona, Tengwar, and Cirth have all actually been recognize= d as having a large enough user community; the objections being raised now = are actually much more complicated issues to navigate: copyright status and= stability.</div><div><br></div><div>Unicode does not want to include Kling= on without a letter from Paramount's legal department stating that they= will not sue anyone who implements it, but Paramount simply does not care = enough to spend legal resources on that. Tengwar and Cirth are in the hands= of the Tolkien estate, which is extremely controlling=C2=A0about the use o= f their intellectual property and is not going to give permission to encode= them. And while it's legally questionable whether a=C2=A0writing syste= m can actually be copyrighted, Unicode does not have the resources to find = out.</div><div><br></div><div>As for Sitelen Pona, it is still relatively n= ew and unstable: people are still experimenting with new features, new char= acters, and new glyph variants, and the people who came together to write t= he most recent preliminary proposal are still=C2=A0stuck in constant argume= nts over which characters to propose. Unicode actually ran into concerns ab= out stability a few years ago when they needed to update the representative= glyphs for Adlam because it had changed slightly since it was encoded. Uni= code doesn't want to have to update a script every year.</div><div><br>= </div><div>Most recently, the UTC in its most recent meeting actually had a= discussion on how to support newly-created scripts. They suggested that th= e Script Encoding Working Group and the Script Encoding Initiative work tog= ether to develop "support for neoscripts" using "software pa= ckages" that can override character properties for Private Use Area ch= aracters. Whether this will actually happen I have doubts, and it's lik= ely more for the sake of minority languages than conlangs, but it's sti= ll a positive sign.</div><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature"><b= r>-- Rebecca Bettencourt</div></div><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote= "><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 2:09=E2=80= =AFPM Vikki McDonough via Unicode <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]= e.org" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">unicode@c= orp.unicode.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" s= tyle=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);pad= ding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>Hai all!</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br><= /div><div dir=3D"auto">No offense meant to anyone personally, but why does = Unicode seem to be biased against scripts devised for conlangs?=C2=A0 To th= e best of my knowledge, <i>every single time</i>=C2=A0such a script's b= een proposed for inclusion, it's ultimately been rejected (albeit with = different levels of vehemence - Klingon and Sarati both ended up on the Not= the Roadmap hall of shame [Klingon from each of <i>two separate</i>=C2=A0p= roposals], Sitelen Pona was merely rejected, and Tengwar and Corth actually= made it into the roadmap to the SMP only to languish there for years befor= e eventually being removed earlier this spring), even for those (like Kling= on) with an active user base considerably larger than those of some obscure= natural-language scripts that <i>do</i>=C2=A0get encoded.=C2=A0 (In contra= st, conlangs that use an existing script do <i>occasionally</i>=C2=A0get th= eir language-specific letters encoded, such as the Volap=C3=BCk-specific La= tin letters already published in Unicode.)</div><div><br></div><div><div di= r=3D"ltr"><div><br></div>- Vikki McDonough =F0=9F=8F=B3=EF=B8=8F=E2=80=8D= =E2=9A=A7=EF=B8=8F</div></div></div> </blockquote></div> </blockquote></div> </blockquote></div> </blockquote></div> </blockquote></div> </blockquote></div> --00000000000010cd960652ccfc31--