On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:39:55 -0700 Ken Whistler <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The ICU implementation of collation tailoring for changed ordering > > is bizarre in some complicated cases. (Life can be complicated.) > > Should UTS#35 be documenting what ICU does, or should Unicode be > > saying what ICU should do when implementing a tailoring expressed > > in LDML? > Well, "Unicode" should not be "saying" what anybody should do here. I thought the Unicode Consortium had a formal policy of forbidding untrue (or "misleading") claims of conformance to Unicode standards. And yes, I understand that there is limited point in producing standards no one considers it worth striving to conform to. > UTS #35 is owned by the CLDR-TC, not the UTC or the Unicode Consortium > as a whole. I've dug further into the structure of Unicode, and now see that the CLDR-TC is independent of the UTC, though both depend on the full members of the Consortium for their authority. Indeed, it seems that the UTC could have a policy of forbidding non-characters in publicly available plain text data files, while the CLDR-TC could positively encourage them! Richard.
