On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 2:57 PM, <keld@keldix.com> wrote:
I qould like that we use the reference to ISO 10646 instead of the unicode inc. reference.
I have advocated that for quite a long time  now.

Either is fine by me, as long as the paper has a justification for not following Unicode's own recommended guidance. Then we don't need to play the bikeshed game each time we want to update that particular reference.

 
Best regards
keld

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 09:43:22PM +0000, Steve Downey wrote:
> I've been told that some people believe there's a policy that ISO Standards
> must cite other ISO Standards where those are available, which is why we're
> citing the ISO copies of Unicode and ECMAScript. I can't find an actual
> policy on this, though.
> I'm willing to put in the Unicode.org preferred reference, with a fallback
> to the ISO reference. My only fear is that too many choices will lead to
> paralysis.
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:44 PM JF Bastien <cxx@jfbastien.com> wrote:
>
> > The Unicode standard has guidance on how to cite it:
> >
> > http://www.unicode.org/versions/index.html#Citations
> >
> > It would be useful to link to this guidance (and follow it).
> >
> > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Steve Downey <sdowney@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> https://github.com/steve-downey/sg16/blob/d10250/papers/D1025R0.md
> >>
> >> There are some formatting issues I will clean up, in particular changing
> >> the links to not raw links, and moving the links down to a bibliography
> >> section.
> >>
> >> Also adding a title at the top.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Unicode mailing list
> >> Unicode@isocpp.open-std.org
> >> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
> >>
> >>

> _______________________________________________
> Unicode mailing list
> Unicode@isocpp.open-std.org
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode