Please see the attached defect report, as revised.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: SG16 <sg16-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Peter Brett via SG16
> Sent: 29 November 2021 13:00
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]>
> > Sent: 29 November 2021 12:48
> >
> > On 29/11/2021 12.23, Peter Brett wrote:
> > > As a quick follow-up, several of the points made in the new paper:
> > >
> > > P2491 Text encodings follow-up (Jens Maurer)
> > >
> >
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://wg21.link/p2491r0__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!W3f
> > 6yGbsDw4PiVMW6KiWBYYKXHJZmVfrhOBK4g2hSA32LbR3kfd_ksMo5QpnqA$
> > >
> > > rest on the discrepancy in the specification of the UTF-16 encoding
> scheme
> > between the Unicode Standard 14.0.0 and ISO 10646:2020. The project
> editor
> > for ISO 10646 believes this to be a defect which will be brought into line
> > with the Unicode Standard in the next revision of ISO 10646, which is
> > currently being prepared.
> > >
> > > I hope that P2491 can be revised to mention this.
> >
> > Does ISO 10646 have a defect tracking system that is publicly
> > visible, so that we can monitor the progress and have a bug-id
> > to refer to?
>
> Not that I'm aware of. If you need to refer to the defect(s), use N5168 as
> the reference number.
>
> > Beyond that, I believe the reference to "higher-level protocol"
> > in the proposed resolution is underspecified; I don't know what
> > a "higher-level protocol" is.
>
> I don't consider that to be within the scope of the defect report, which is
> to bring ISO 10646 into alignment with the Unicode Standard. However, I'll
> add an additional comment that perhaps "higher-level protocol" could be more
> specifically defined. If this is of particular concern perhaps it would be
> best to start by getting it more precisely defined in the Unicode Standard.
>
> > Beyond that, Note 3 in section 12 of ISO 10646:2020 (not Note 2 as
> > mentioned in the paper) suggests "0007 BELL", which is ambiguous
> > with U+1F514 BELL. This should use "ALERT" instead.
>
> I will add an additional issue.
>
> > I hope that N5168 can be revised to fix these issues.
>
> Sure, I'll send the project editor an updated paper.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Peter