C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: NB comment review: FR Annex E [uaxid] Shorten contents and integrate with [lex.name]

From: Steve Downey <sdowney_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 13:25:26 -0400
As currently rendered, the annex is a bit shouty. If we keep it, perhaps
introduce a single new top level and demote the rest of the sections to
something more table like.

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:56 AM Tom Honermann via SG16 <
sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Please review the following. If you agree with the proposed change and
> have no further information to add, then there is no need to respond. If
> you disagree with the proposed change, have corrections or new information
> to offer, or have comments on the candidate polls, then *please reply by
> Monday, October 31st*. FR Annex E [uaxid] <http://eel.is/c++draft/uaxid>
> Shorten contents and integrate with [lex.name]
> GitHub nbballot issue #411
> <https://github.com/cplusplus/nbballot/issues/411>.
> Comment:
> The usefulness of that clause is debatable.
> Please state in [lex.name] the set of rules/profiles followed by c++
> identifiers, rather than listing all of the rules that do not apply.
> Proposed change:
> Only state "C++ conforms to UAX31 by meeting the requirements R1 “Default
> Identifiers” and R4 “Equivalent Normalized Identifiers” and remove [uaxid]
> SG16 chair notes:
> As discussed in the 2022-10-19 SG16 telecon
> <https://github.com/sg16-unicode/sg16-meetings#october-19th-2022>, this
> comment has interaction with US-64.
> Candidate polls:
> - [FR-XX]: SG16 recommends accepting the comment in the direction of
> the proposed change.
> - [FR-XX]: SG16 recommends rejecting the comment on the basis that
> explicit indication of Unicode requirement conformance, non-conformance, or
> inapplicability is useful.
> Tom.
> --
> SG16 mailing list
> SG16_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg16

Received on 2022-10-26 17:25:37