C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: ISO/IEC WG2 proposed resolution for WG2 N5168, "Name aliases and UTF-16 encoding scheme are inconsistent with the Unicode Standard"

From: Peter Brett <pbrett_at_[hidden]>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:26:03 +0000
I’m satisfied with these changes. I’m not sure why the project editor never pinged me when he published his proposed resolution, though!

Best regards,


From: SG16 <sg16-bounces_at_[hidden].org> On Behalf Of Tom Honermann via SG16
Sent: 28 March 2022 20:03
To: sg16_at_[hidden]
Peter Brett submitted WG2 N5168<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.unicode.org/wg2/docs/n5168R1-ISO10646.pdf__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!Ui-G6jJ78q_vF-kMo1TxxlPiWh4wQtuxIoGOU9k1G94JCczN2b3yP7nuXx5llg$> to ISO/IEC WG2 (the WG that produces ISO/IEC 10646) late last year. The paper notes some deficiencies in ISO/IEC 10646 in comparison with the Unicode standard.

The WG2 project editor has since published WG2 N5174<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.unicode.org/wg2/docs/n5174-namesaliases.pdf__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!Ui-G6jJ78q_vF-kMo1TxxlPiWh4wQtuxIoGOU9k1G94JCczN2b3yP7khcGTi7Q$> with a proposed resolution for the concerns raised.

Please review the proposed resolution. If you believe there to be outstanding issues, please respond here so that we can coordinate a response to WG2. My brief review did not reveal any obvious deficiencies in the proposed changes. If no concerns are raised in response, then I'll assume that everyone is content with the proposed changes.

Received on 2022-03-29 09:26:10