On 6/2/2014 9:38 AM, Shawn Steele wrote:
I agree with Markus; I think the FAQ is pretty clear. (And if not,
that's where we should make it clearer.)
But the formal wording of the standard should reflect that clarity, right?
I don't tend to read the FAQ :)
FAQ's are useful, but they are not binding. They are even less binding
than general explanation in the text of the Core specification, which
itself doesn't rise to the that of conformance clauses and definition...
Doug's unease about the "upside-down" nature of the wording regarding
PUA and noncharacters is something that should be addressed in revised
text in the core specification.
A./
_______________________________________________
Unicode mailing list
Unicode@unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
_______________________________________________
Unicode mailing list
Unicode@unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
