4 ms·
"There's all these different, sort of, approaches, which are fundamentally, obviously reflecting cultural models — cultural biases," Brunton adds. "But when the
by djent 12y ago
"There's all these different, sort of, approaches, which are fundamentally, obviously reflecting cultural models — cultural biases," Brunton adds. "But when they get substantiated into software, they turn into exclusionary systems."
"We are planning to cover all of Unicode and support all languages"[0]
None of the complains in this article seem valid. They appear to either complain about Unicode, or complain that Google hasn't added X language yet - and therefore Google is evil.
[0] https://code.google.com/p/noto/issues/detail?id=39 https://code.google.com/p/noto/issues/detail?id=39
- chimeracoder 12y ago> None of the complains in this article seem valid. They appear to either complain about Unicode, The complaints about Unicode are absolutely valid. They conflate somewhat the targets of the criticism, since Google didn't unilaterally define the Unicode codepoints, but when Google presents Noto as a font for 'all the world's languages', it's perfectly valid to point out that their definition of 'all the world's languages' is based on a biased and/or exclusionary system (Unicode), and explain why that is biased, which they did. Remember that this is a piece of news targeted towards the general public. Given that, they do a reasonable job of explaining the difference between Google and the Unicode Consortium, and appropriately spend most of their time focusing on the impact of the design decisions on the languages in question.
- skybrian 12y agoIs it fixable? There are new Unicode releases.