Replying so that this message is reflected in the SG16 list archives due
to an archive failure following the transition to the new SG16 mailing
list.

Tom.

On 11/18/19 11:12 AM, keld--- via SG16 wrote:
> yes I would think so, but I prefer to use ISo specks when possible.
>
> keld
>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 06:16:23PM -0500, Steve Downey wrote:
>> Probably the same as TR31 from the Unicode Standard?
>>
>> https://unicode.org/reports/tr31/
>>
>> We will be revisiting using that for 23, and have not ruled out treating it
>> as fixing a defect report.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2019, 17:22 <keld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> the annex of 10646 in question is Annex U (informative) Characters in
>>> identifiers .
>>>
>>>
>>> keld
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 08:48:52AM +0100, keld_at_[hidden] wrote:
>>>> I think weshould use the spec in iso 10646 on characters to be used for
>>> identifiers,
>>>> this is most likely the same as the unicode spec.
>>>>
>>>> keld
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 09:26:53AM +0100, Corentin wrote:
>>>>> Hello.
>>>>> Attached to SG-7, SG-16 and at this link
>>>>> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D1953R0.pdf is a late paper (mostly
>>>>> targeting the hallway track) about the impact of Unicode identifiers
>>> on the
>>>>> reflection proposals
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Corentin
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> SG16 Unicode mailing list
>>>>> Unicode_at_[hidden]
>>>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SG16 Unicode mailing list
>>>> Unicode_at_[hidden]
>>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SG16 Unicode mailing list
>>> Unicode_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
>>>