On 11/18/2011 3:06 PM, Ken Whistler wrote:
On 11/18/2011 1:30 PM, Karl Williamson wrote:
How is this different from Named sequences, which are published
provisionally?
Named sequences aren't character properties.
The provide information about characters in context - in that sense they
are similar to many other properties, even if most of them can be mapped
to single character codes (with the contextual behavior left to
algorithms and rules).
That is not to detract from your main point, with which I fully agree,
that this puts them into the realm of information that is not required
to be defined for a character to minimally defined or and that needs to
be available from day one for a character to be implementable at all
(such as decomp mappings, bidi class, code point, name, etc.).
If you want to make analogies, however, the ISO ballots constitute the
*provisional* publication
for character code points and names. If nobody has any objections or
corrections
expressed during the ballotting process (which can continue for 2
years or longer),
then eventually those code points and names get "moved" into the
(immutable)
list in the standard.
Good point.
If it would be manageable, I would recommend for Unicode to have a
public review process on its own for character proposals, so as to
elicit broader public review before data is finalized for publication.
In the Unicode process, there's a public beta, but that is useful only
to spot mistakes in the publishing process - it's usually too late to
fix substantial mistakes of any kind.
A./
