--On Tuesday, September 02, 2014 19:35 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote:
> This evening I plan to submit: > > draft-ietf-precis-framework-18 > draft-saintandre-precis-codepoints-00 > > It is likely that framework-18 will not address every issue > that John Klensin raised in his message of April 24: > > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/precis/current/msg00749.h > tml > > However, in the interest of making progress I think it will be > useful to address the larger issues at this time, then submit > a revised I-D that addresses the smaller issues. Seems sensible to me. I'll try to start working through the new version of framework RSN. Questions/comments about "codepoints" and your intent: First, I think having the tables separate and unambiguously illustrative and Informational, is a desirable step. Second, because I'm still concerned about U+08A1 (for those who don't know why, see discussion on IDNA list and elsewhere), I looked it up and found "<reserved>". That is consistent with my preference at the moment but: Your explanation in Section 1 says that this is based strictly on Unicode 7.0. If calculated according to the existing rules and Unicode 7.0, it is clearly assigned. I think it is valid and has a category, probably PVALID, there is nothing "UNASSIGNED" about it. Editorial recommendation: Recognizing the line length limits, I think it would be desirable to at least try to spell out the script names or, if that is not impossible, to provide a script name <-> abbreviation table. It will make things much easier to find it people go looking for the characters in a script that are usable. I assume that would be a common case. john _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
