> Whether adding the latter would turn some "yes" votes into
> "no" votes in EWG is unknown. Let's ask.
For clarity, any innovation by WG21 that deviates from the UAX31 guideline will turn my vote from a 'yes' to a 'no' for P1949.
This is not an area in which WG21 should be innovating. People who think that UAX31 is too restrictive and/or not restrictive enough should be getting involved in Unicode in order to enhance UAX31.
For the record, I very strongly agree.
I further think that exploration of the optional parts of UAX ( allowing ZW(N)J in specific contexts) should be done in a separate paper and hopefully by people familiar with the few concerned scripts and their use / users.
SG16 mailing list