DFDL implementors at IBM have noticed some issues with the ICU library worth noting. There is an ICU pull request to fix, targeted at ICU version 70.1.
________________________________ From: .... Subject: IBM DFDL is upgrading ICU level Hi Mike We are moving up the level of ICU that IBM DFDL is built with, as it is still on 51 which is out-of-support. We are trying 68.x. In the process we found several of our regression tests failed due to behaviour changes in lax decimal/calendar processing. If you recall we deliberately changed the DFDL 1.0 spec to make lax implementation-dependent/defined (I forget which). We've analysed the differences and most are to do with bug fixes or other changes that are acceptable or benign or we don't think any of our customer will hit. However, we got 400 failures in our Java version which didn't appear in our C version. This looks to be have been caused by a regression somewhere, we think back in 62 - see https://unicode-org.atlassian.net/browse/ICU-20425. ICU have accepted there is a problem and the fix is in PR https://github.com/unicode-org/icu/pull/1726 which is targeted at 70.1. Letting you know as moving to 70.1 and higher might therefore cause a Daffodil behaviour change. Regards Steve Hanson IBM Hybrid Integration, Hursley, UK Architect, IBM DFDL<http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/se-dfdl/index.html> Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group<http://www.ogf.org/dfdl/>
