On 6/1/2014 9:07 AM, Markus Scherer wrote:
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Karl Williamson
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks, I had not thought about that. I'm thinking wording
something like this is more appropriate
"Noncharacters may be openly interchanged, but it is inadvisable
to do so without prior agreement, since at each stage any of them
might be replaced by a REPLACEMENT CHARACTER or otherwise disposed
of, at the sole discretion of that stage's implementation."
I think that would invite again the kinds of implementations that
triggered Corrigendum #9, where you couldn't use CLDR files with
Gnome-based tools (plain text editors, file diff tools, command-line
terminal) if the files contained noncharacters. (CLDR data uses them
for boundary mappings in collation data.)
The new text triggers some really unwarranted interpretations, which can
invalidate the use of noncharacters for their stated purpose.
Please see my suggested text that attempts to describe both intent and
differences in use.
A./
_______________________________________________
Unicode mailing list
[email protected]
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
