Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 14:32:01 +0200
ISO 30112 doesn't seem to be enough in the long run either.
Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't have access to the document), but
from the abstract it sounds like this just specifies description
formats; no algorithms and no data, just ways to specify them.
It doesn't cover the ground in https://unicode.org/reports/tr15/,
... (roughly in order of importance). I don't know if there are
ISO standards specifying the same aspects and staying in sync. I
don't think there are any; the Unicode FAQ doesn't mention any ISO
standard other than ISO 10646 (https://www.unicode.org/faq/unicode_iso.html).
If there are, let's use them; if there aren't, I think it'd be
preferable to just have one single reference to the Unicode
specification than to have several references to standards that
may or may not get updated in lockstep and may or may reflect the
current state of the Unicode Standard.
FWIW I only mentioned annexes because they're easier to link to than the core specification, even though there are some algorithms formally defined within it that are also not covered in ISO 10646 nor ISO 30112. Also note that a reference to a specific Unicode version encompasses "an edition of the core specification, The Unicode Standard, together with the Code Charts, Unicode Standard Annexes and the Unicode Character Database" (from https://www.unicode.org/standard/standard.html)
If you want more than just character sets, you should refer ISO 30112, which Unicode has tried to copy. 30112 is much more shaped to the POSIX/C/C++ model - not just UCS. Best regards keld On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 11:59:58PM +0200, R. Martinho Fernandes wrote:Can you explain why? For now the ISO reference is enough, but in the future we will need the Unicode Standard reference because ISO 10646 is only the character set. On May 4, 2018 11:57:08 PM GMT+02:00, keld_at_[hidden] wrote:I qould like that we use the reference to ISO 10646 instead of the unicode inc. reference. I have advocated that for quite a long time now. Best regards keld On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 09:43:22PM +0000, Steve Downey wrote:I've been told that some people believe there's a policy that ISOStandardsmust cite other ISO Standards where those are available, which is whywe'reciting the ISO copies of Unicode and ECMAScript. I can't find anactualpolicy on this, though. I'm willing to put in the Unicode.org preferred reference, with afallbackto the ISO reference. My only fear is that too many choices will leadtoparalysis. On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:44 PM JF Bastien <cxx_at_[hidden]> wrote:The Unicode standard has guidance on how to cite it: http://www.unicode.org/versions/index.html#Citations It would be useful to link to this guidance (and follow it). On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Steve Downey <sdowney_at_[hidden]>wrote:https://github.com/steve-downey/sg16/blob/d10250/papers/D1025R0.md There are some formatting issues I will clean up, in particularchangingthe links to not raw links, and moving the links down to abibliographysection. Also adding a title at the top. _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode_at_[hidden] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode_at_[hidden] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode_at_[hidden] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list Unicode_at_[hidden] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
Received on 2018-05-16 14:33:16