Hi,

> On Nov 8, 2022, at 1:04 PM, Corentin via SG16 <sg16_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Thomas for the quick response.
> This is excellent news.
> We probably want SG16 to confirm the direction as there were some dissident voices.
> If we decide to move forward, I'm happy to review the terminology/write a paper for that (along with replacing the term translation set if SG16) gets consensus on that.
>
> UCS Scalar value => Unicode scalar value
> character (where we do mean character) => abstract character
> code point/code unit => unchanged.
>
> If we think there are definitions in Unicode that lack precision, I think we can talk to Unicode folks about improving them.
> In the past we have had to ask iso 10646 to align some definitions with Unicode as important details were missing,
> so lack of clarity wouldn't become a new problem.


This was going to be my comment as well.

In this discussion and in the linked meeting notes I didn’t see concrete examples of exactly how "the Unicode Standard does not define terms in the same way and at the same level of precision as ISO 10646 does”.

Are there some other examples? Thanks!

-Steven