At 10:39 -0400 2004-07-12, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >>Their deviation from the definitions of the words as they were presented
> >>to the scholarly public in 1988 [talks in Princeton, Chicago, and
> >>Milwaukee], 1990, 1992, and 1996.
> >
>> ... which definitions we are to discern from the ether by means of
>> mental powers?
>
>Hunh?

Well, apparently the definitions deviate from things you said in
public, and may or may not have published in some of those years
mentioned.

>I note, incidentally, that you didn't simply Quote what I posted, but
>silently inserted hyphens where the move from FrameMaker to e-mail
>resulted in irregular spacing.

I can't imagine why anyone would complain about a minor bit of
formatting to make some text more legible in e-mail, nor that it
would be necessary to do so anyway but silently.

>Dammit Michael, they're YOUR definitions; you presumably have them on
>paper in front of you. Type them, between the above paragraphs, and see
>whether you can spot the differences all by yourself.

No, Peter. In the first place they are not MY definitions; they are
those of the Unicode Standard. I didn't write them. In the second
place, YOU are the one who has said that there is something wrong
with them, and it is up to YOU to inform us what, if you want us to
do anything about it. I am not going to try to parse the difference
and determine what it is that YOU think is wrong with the Unicode
definitions.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com