Comments that don't affect the normative content:

No need for comma (and attendant typo) in "unassigned , or unnecessary".

Should SG16 be still listed as part of the audience?


This sentence is ambiguous:
This proposal does not address some potential security concerns, so called
homoglyph attacks, where letters that appear the same may be treated as
distinct.

Is the intended scope of the "potential security concerns" coincident with
"homoglyph attacks"?


Replace:
Defending against such attacks is complex and evolving
with
Methods of defense against such attacks is complex and evolving

-- HT

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 6:01 PM Steve Downey via SG16 <sg16_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Find attached D1949 with edits as instructed in telecon
> --
> SG16 mailing list
> SG16_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
>