I’d be comfortable with this approach.

 

              Peter

 

From: SG16 <sg16-bounces@lists.isocpp.org> On Behalf Of Corentin via SG16
Sent: 17 March 2021 17:20
To: SG16 <sg16@lists.isocpp.org>
Cc: Corentin <corentin.jabot@gmail.com>
Subject: [SG16] Yet another approach to consensus for P2314

 

EXTERNAL MAIL

Hello,
I'd like to know how people would feel about adoption P231 with the following modifications

- In paragraph 1, change "Physical source file characters are mapped, in an implementation-defined manner, to the translation character set" to

"Physical source file characters are mapped, in an implementation-defined manner, to elements of the universal character set (excluding surrogates) [Note: Not all elements of the Universal character set are assigned to abstract characters]".

 

- In  5.3 remove the definition of translation character set

- Change
A universal-character-name designates the abstract character in the translation character set whose UCS scalar value is the hexadecimal number represented by the sequence of hexadecimal-digits in the universal-character-name
to
A universal-character-name designates the element in the Universal character set whose UCS scalar value is the hexadecimal number represented by the sequence of hexadecimal-digits in the universal-character-name

- In the rest of the document, replace translation character set by Universal character set

 

- Postpone replacement of other misuses of the term "character" to future papers

 

I think it represents a reasonable consensus and I'd like to know if people who opposed the scalar value direction would feel the same.

 

 

Thanks, 

 

Corentin

 

 

PS: As ever this is a terminology discussion with no behavior impact