Re: Two questions here. Is the Pridnestrovian Ruble not used enough to be added to Unicode, and did I mess up by sending my proposal thrice?
Markus Scherer via Unicode <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.unicode.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAN49p6qW9--JL3hFsASCUMNjMbhBE3C4==qwD5sLj6H2-C0VtA@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 8:18 AM kxeo via Unicode <[email protected]> wrote: > They haven't responded in two weeks. Patience may be key but something > tells me that they aren't getting back. Did the triple email make them > no longer respond? Maybe it was the double email, or maybe they're just > drowning in emails? > Unicode does not work that fast, and shouldn't, because once a character is encoded, it is permanent, and adds to what everyone has to implement. If you look in the document register https://www.unicode.org/L2/L-curdoc.htm -- you will see document L2/24-134 “Proposal to Encode a Pridnestrovian Ruble Sign” There is also document L2/24-166 “Recommendations to UTC #180 July 2024 on Script Proposals” which briefly discusses this proposal, points to an earlier proposal, and makes some suggestions. The Script Encoding Working Group will present L2/24-166 in the quarterly UTC meeting this week. Best regards, markus