Corrigendum #9

On 6/2/2014 3:08 PM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 6/2/2014 2:53 PM, Markus Scherer wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:32 PM, David Starner <prosfilaes at gmail.com>> <mailto:prosfilaes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> I would especially discourage any web browser from handling
>> these; they're noncharacters used for unknown purposes that are
>> undisplayable and if used carelessly for their stated purpose, can
>> probably trigger serious bugs in some lamebrained utility.
>>>>>> I don't expect "handling these" in web browsers and lamebrained
>> utilities. I expect "treat like unassigned code points".
>>>> I can't shake the suspicion that Corrigendum #9 is not actually
> solving a general problem, but is a special favor to CLDR as being run
> by insiders, and in the process muddying the waters for everyone else.
Clarifying:
I still haven't heard from anyone that this solves a general problem
that is widespread. The only actual example has always been CLDR, and
its decision to ship these code points in XML. Shipping these code
points in files was pretty far down the list of "what not to do" when
they were originally adopted. My view continues to be that this is was a
questionable design decision by CLDR, given what was on the record. The
reaction of several outside implementers during this discussion makes
clear that viewing that design as problematic is not just my personal view.
Usually, if there's a discrepancy between an implementation and Unicode,
the reaction is not to retract conformance language. I think arriving at
this decision was easier for the UTC, because CLDR is not a random,
unrelated implementation. And, as in any group, it's perhaps easier to
not be as keenly aware of the impact on external implementations.
So, I'd like to clarify, that this is the sense in which I meant
"special favor", and which therefore is not the most felicitous
expression to describe what I had in mind.
A./
>> A./
>>> _______________________________________________
> Unicode mailing list
>Unicode at unicode.org>http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20140603/374735bb/attachment.html>