於 Jul 12, 2004 4:11 AM 時，Michael Everson 提到：

> At 21:31 -0400 2004-07-11, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> (a) We've been told that nothing will be changed no matter what
>> anyone says;
>
> That isn't true.
>

Indeed. I believe the misunderstanding arose because I stated we
cannot remove the term "ideograph" from the standard inasmuch as it's
in the name of some 70,000 characters and five blocks. The *text* of
the standard can be fixed. If there's evidence that linguists and
sinologists have adopted one term in preference to all others, we'll
gladly substitute that in the text. Until then, we'll continue our
current policy of using the word that everybody -- even non-experts --
understand, with appropriate explanations as to why it's considered
incorrect.

========
John H. Jenkins
jenkins@...
jhjenkins@...
http://homepage.mac.com/jhjenkins/