Ah, thanks! The other link looked paywalled (and was anyways in French).

Zach


On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Martinho Fernandes <rmf_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Why settle for a draft when it's publicly available for free? It's here:
> http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html.
>
> Note that it does not define normalization, and instead it refers to
> UAX#15.
>
> On 16.05.18 17:55, Zach Laine wrote:
>
> Alisdair, 14651 sounds like it contains normalization and collation. Is
> that right? Also, any idea where a draft might be found? I'd hate to pay
> just to have a peek at something I don't actually have a use for.
>
> Zach
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:29 AM, Alisdair Meredith <alisdairm_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> As far as I can tell, ISO 14651 covers the algorithms, or at least a
>> start on them:
>> https://www.iso.org/standard/68309.html
>>
>>
>> For C++20 I believe ISO 10646 is all that is needed, as the standard uses
>> unicode directly for
>> only definitions of character sets. Once SG-16 creates a proposal for
>> deeper support, it will
>> probably want these additional references though.
>>
>> AlisdairM
>>
>>
>> On May 16, 2018, at 08:32, Martinho Fernandes <rmf_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> 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/,
>> https://unicode.org/reports/tr29/, https://unicode.org/reports/tr14/,
>> https://unicode.org/reports/tr9/, https://unicode.org/reports/tr50/, ...
>> (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)
>> On 16.05.18 14:10, keld_at_[hidden] wrote:
>>
>> 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 ISO
>>
>> Standards
>>
>> must cite other ISO Standards where those are available, which is why
>>
>> we're
>>
>> citing the ISO copies of Unicode and ECMAScript. I can't find an
>>
>> actual
>>
>> policy on this, though.
>> I'm willing to put in the Unicode.org preferred reference, with a
>>
>> fallback
>>
>> to the ISO reference. My only fear is that too many choices will lead
>>
>> to
>>
>> paralysis.
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:44 PM JF Bastien <cxx_at_[hidden]> <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]> <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 particular
>>
>> changing
>>
>> the links to not raw links, and moving the links down to a
>>
>> bibliography
>>
>> section.
>>
>> Also adding a title at the top.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unicode mailing listUnicode_at_[hidden]://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unicode mailing listUnicode_at_[hidden]://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unicode mailing listUnicode_at_[hidden]://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unicode mailing listUnicode_at_[hidden]://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>
>>
>> --
>> Martinho
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> --
> Martinho
>
>