On 28/05/2020 03.37, Steve Downey wrote:
> Thank you. Queued for R5.

I believe those changes are editorial (i.e. do not change
the intended and agreed meaning of the paper), so they
should go in as early as possible.

Jens


> On Wed, May 27, 2020, 20:36 Hubert Tong <hubert.reinterpretcast_at_[hidden] <mailto:hubert.reinterpretcast_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
> 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] <mailto:sg16_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
> Find attached D1949 with edits as instructed in telecon
> --
> SG16 mailing list
> SG16_at_[hidden] <mailto:SG16_at_[hidden]>
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16
>