Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 20:26:41 -0500
On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 7:23 PM Tom Honermann via Core <core_at_[hidden]>
wrote:
> On 11/8/22 3:27 PM, Steven R. Loomis wrote:
> > 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!
>
> No specific examples have been raised or discussed as far as I know. I
> am going to add this concern as an agenda topic for a future SG16
> telecon. If actionable suggestions for improvements are raised, I'll
> ensure such suggestions are communicated to the Unicode Consortium.
>
I would like to be in attendance when that is discussed. I have noted,
however, that I have many vacation days to take this year (and will likely
not be attending SG16 telecons until the new year).
>
> Tom.
>
> >
> > -Steven
> _______________________________________________
> Core mailing list
> Core_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13465.php
>
wrote:
> On 11/8/22 3:27 PM, Steven R. Loomis wrote:
> > 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!
>
> No specific examples have been raised or discussed as far as I know. I
> am going to add this concern as an agenda topic for a future SG16
> telecon. If actionable suggestions for improvements are raised, I'll
> ensure such suggestions are communicated to the Unicode Consortium.
>
I would like to be in attendance when that is discussed. I have noted,
however, that I have many vacation days to take this year (and will likely
not be attending SG16 telecons until the new year).
>
> Tom.
>
> >
> > -Steven
> _______________________________________________
> Core mailing list
> Core_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/core
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/core/2022/11/13465.php
>
Received on 2022-11-09 01:27:11