This seems great in concept, and totally infeasible. But if anyone can do it, unicode seems like a great candidate.

Does anyone have reason for more optimism?

Care to explain why you think it's infeasible? Then one could provide targeted counter-optimism ;)

I don't see what's infeasible about it. It doesn't seem too different from .po files (gettext catalogs) meshed with hooks for post-processing as would see in e.g. a handlebars, both of which have individually found great adoption.

	▲	bmn__ 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> why you think it's infeasible? GP based his opinion on the assumption that this spec new and no implementations for it exist.

▲

junon 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unicode consortium already manages a ton of language specs. If there's any group of folks I'd trust to understand languages (natural or otherwise), it's them.

	▲	Cthulhu_ 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is the one. Think of all the "misconceptions developer have about X" lists, I trust Unicode to have encountered (if not written) all of them. The people behind unicode are thorough. I mean they have hieroglyphs, some of which have plurals: https://www.unicode.org/charts/nameslist/n_13000.html

▲

tuyiown 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I've been using this format for almost 10 years, and I only see increasing adoption. Why would I be pessimistic?