Sounds good. I'll put this on the agenda for our meeting on the ... oh,
it's complicated.

We are currently scheduled to meet October 13th and 27th, but both of
those dates are problematic because of the NDC (week of October 13th)
and CppCon (week of October 27th) conferences. So, we need to make some
changes.

I rescheduled the October 13th meeting to October 6th (next week)
earlier today; I'll communicate that separately and with an agenda shortly.

I would like to also reschedule the October 27th meeting for October
20th and put this paper (P2071) on its agenda.

There are no meetings scheduled for November yet because I only
scheduled through the next daylight savings time change (November 7th).
I'm planning to schedule those soon and intend to stick to our 2nd and
4th weeks of the month plan.

Please let me know ASAP about any concerns with the above.

Tom.

On 9/29/21 3:50 PM, Steve Downey via SG16 wrote:
> In order to make progress on wording I'd like to have some polls taken
> for named unicode escape sequences, since we've learned and changed a
> few things since the papers were first written.
>
> 1)
> In light of progress on D2290 Delimited escape sequences adding the
> form \u{ simple-hexadecimal-digit-sequence } to
> universal-character-name, named escape sequence should be an alternate
> form of universal-character-name, rather than only for literals.
>
> u-char:
> digit
> nondigit
>
> u-char-sequence:
> u-char
> u-char-sequence u-char
>
> universal-character-name:
> add \U{ u-char-sequence }
>
> Add text to say that u-char-sequence must match a name or alias in the
> UCD.
>
>
> 2)
> In light of the implementation experience using the Unicode standard
> rules for matching names producing a compact data form with fast
> lookup, propose that be adopted rather than mandating CAPITAL only
> exact match rules.
>
> Note that many online sources of codepoint names are lax about exact
> match.
>
>