C++ Logo

SG16

Advanced search

Subject: Re: Yet another approach to consensus for P2314
From: Tom Honermann (tom_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-03-24 14:08:44


On 3/24/21 2:08 PM, Corentin via SG16 wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 11:38 PM Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]
> <mailto:Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
>
> I can't find a definition of the term "universal character set" in
> ISO 10646,
> and your suggested rewrite doesn't include a definition.
>
>
> Universal Coded Character Set then
>
> I don't have a copy of a recent ISO 10646, unfortunately

It (ISO/IEC 10646:2020 edition 6) is publicly available from
https://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html.

Tom.

>
> Jens
>
>
>
> On 17/03/2021 18.20, Corentin via SG16 wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I'd like to know how people would feel about adoption P231 with
> the following modifications
> >
> > - In paragraph 1, change "Physical source file characters are
> mapped, in an implementation-defined manner, to the translation
> character set" to
> >
> > "Physical source file characters are mapped, in an
> implementation-defined manner, to elements of the universal
> character set (excluding surrogates) [Note: Not all elements of
> the Universal character set are assigned to abstract characters]".
> >
> > - In  5.3 remove the definition of translation character set
> >
> > - Change
> > A universal-character-name designates the abstract character in
> the translation character set whose UCS scalar value is the
> hexadecimal number represented by the sequence of
> hexadecimal-digits in the universal-character-name
> > to
> > A universal-character-name designates the element in the
> Universal character set whose UCS scalar value is the hexadecimal
> number represented by the sequence of hexadecimal-digits in the
> universal-character-name
> >
> > - In the rest of the document, replace translation character set
> by Universal character set
> >
> > - Postpone replacement of other misuses of the term "character"
> to future papers
> >
> > I think it represents a reasonable consensus and I'd like to
> know if people who opposed the scalar value direction would feel
> the same.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Corentin
> >
> >
> > PS: As ever this is a terminology discussion with no behavior
> impact
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>



SG16 list run by sg16-owner@lists.isocpp.org