I will double check the design wording against the Unicode database, but I
believe the current one references the list that is just the spelling fixes
and such.
The very good news in that respect is that it would be non-conflicting to
extend that later.

I will fix up the wording per your notes, in particular the non-formatting
one, which I agree is clearer.


On Wed, Nov 3, 2021, 04:21 Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 03.07, Steve Downey via SG16 wrote:
> > Updated paper with wording for UCN form of named unicode characters,
> with changes as suggested by Jens. This reflects the strongest consensus in
> EWG for exact matches.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Prose text:
>
> "the ISO/IEC standard that specifies a subset of what is specified in the
> Unicode standard and is kept synchronized with it."
>
> Could we please limit that synchronization claim to the assigned character
> set?
> Something like the definition of UTF-16 is not fully in sync between
> Unicode
> and ISO 10646.
>
>
> Wording:
>
> Grammar for universal-character-name:
> The third option "named-universal-character" was added and needs to be
> green
> (and preferably underlined).
>
>
> \u hex-quad or \U hex-quad hex-quad
>
> The \u and \U needs to be fixed-width font.
>
>
> A named-universal-character designates the character in the translation
> character set whose associated character name as assigned by ISO 10646
> matches the given n-char-sequence.
>
>
> named-universal-character needs to be italics (grammar non-terminal).
>
>
> "whose associated character name ... matches"
>
> This seems to talk about names only, not about aliases.
> "whose" further deepens the impression that each character
> has a single name.
>
> "matches": We don't have fuzzy match, so just say "is".
>
>
> Suggestion:
>
> "A named-universal-character designates the character in the translation
> character set
> whose associated character name or character name alias is the given
> n-char-sequence.
> The program is ill-formed if there is no such character."
>
>
> Turn the drafting note into a proper note.
> Meanwhile, ISO 10646:2020 is out, so we should refer to that.
>
>
> Note that a "character name alias" per ISO 10646 is only used
> for typo corrections and similar, and only these aliases are
> deemed normative by ISO 10646.
>
> Other aliases, such as "bang" for "EXCLAMATION MARK",
> are called "informative aliases" and are non-normative.
> Those are currently excluded from C++ per the proposed normative
> wording. Is that intentional?
>
> (See ISO 10646:2020 section 34.3.)
>
> Jens
>