Hi,

I can't make it for tomorrow's telecon, but I'm opposed to the paper:
I think it leaves the core language in a state where we have uses of
the term "(Unicode) code point" adjacent to "character", and they're
intended to be synonymous, yet have entirely different spelling.
Also, "Unicode code point" is a mouthful that impairs English
legibility compared to "character".

If we feel the technical term "character" is underspecified for C++,
maybe adding a sentence to the existing [lex.charset] along the lines
of "A /character/ is an element of the translation character set."
would help.

And I don't care that "character" has vague meaning everywhere else
including in the Unicode standard; as long as we clearly define
what it means in C++ and the C++ meaning is not entirely disjoint
from the "everywhere else" meaning, I'm fine.

I appreciate that makes C++ not conform to Unicode in some sense,
but I feel the practical difference is zero, including forward
compatibility with abstract characters that get assigned code points
in the future.

Jens



On 30/01/2023 23.40, Tom Honermann via SG16 wrote:
> SG16 will hold a telecon on Wednesday, February 1st, at 19:30 UTC (timezone conversion <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html?iso=20230201T193000&p1=1440&p2=tz_pst&p3=tz_mst&p4=tz_cst&p5=tz_est&p6=tz_cet>).
>
> The agenda follows.
>
> * D2749R0 <https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D2749R0.pdf>: Down with ”character”
>
> During our previous telecon <https://github.com/sg16-unicode/sg16-meetings#january-25th-2023> (for which a summary will be published soon so that the preceding link does something useful), we agreed to meet this week to continue review of D2749R0. This will be our last opportunity to review this paper with a goal of approving it for C++23.
>
> Tom.
>
>