- From: Francois Yergeau <FYergeau@alis.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:15:27 -0400
- To: Markus Scherer <markus.scherer@jtcsv.com>, charsets <ietf-charsets@iana.org>
Markus Scherer wrote: > 1. Paragraph 34: "... to be discussed in section 5." > must refer to section 7, not 5. > (It is section 5 in RFC 2279.) Good catch. I had forgotten to update to an <xref> element. > 2. Section 5 (BOM) > I suggest to add a paragraph about Unicode 3.2's addition > of U+2060 Word Joiner. What about this: In an attempt at diminishing the uncertainty, Unicode 3.2 adds a new character, U+2060 WORD JOINER, with exactly the same semantics and usage as U+FEFF except for the signature function, and strongly recommends its exclusive use for expressing word-joining semantics. Eventually, following this recommendation will make it all but certain that any initial U+FEFF is a signature, not an intended "ZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK SPACE". > 3. Bibliography > I suggest to replace the [UNICODE] book/ISBN reference > and the link to version 3.0 > with a reference to "Unicode 3.2" > and a link to http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions/ > (Ken and others may have different ideas here). Fine with me. What do others think? BTW, the I-D staff didn't like "draft-yergeau-utf8-rev2..." they suggested "draft-yergeau-rfc2279bis..." instead, so this is it: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-yergeau-rfc2279bis-00.txt. -- François
Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 14:16:37 UTC