On 11/8/22 2:04 PM, Corentin 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.

Agreed with all the above!

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.

Thank you, Corentin!

UCS Scalar value => Unicode scalar value
character (where we do mean character) => abstract character
code point/code unit => unchanged.

Changing UCS scalar value to Unicode scalar value is not problematic and quite reasonable for C++23, but character has so many other issues within the standard that I think it should be addressed separately for a later standard (and I would be very encouraging of anyone wishing to do that work!)

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.

Agreed. The interactions I've had with the Unicode Consortium have demonstrated that they are quite welcoming of suggested improvements.