- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 11:44:57 +0900
- To: eric@w3.org
- Cc: "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <44162E29.1050208@w3.org>
Hi Eric, You had recently (in Mandelieu) a question on citing Unicode. I looked at charmod again and have the impression that the following answers your concern: [[The fact that both ISO/IEC 10646 and the Unicode Standard are evolving (in synchrony) raises the issue of versioning: should a specification refer to a specific version of the standard, or should it make a generic reference, so that the normative reference is to the version current at the time of reading the specification? In general the answer is both. C063 [S] A generic reference to the Unicode Standard MUST be made if it is desired that characters allocated after a specification is published are usable with that specification. A specific reference to the Unicode Standard MAY be included to ensure that functionality depending on a particular version is available and will not change over time. An example would be the set of characters acceptable as Name characters in XML 1.0 [XML 1.0], which is an enumerated list that parsers must implement to validate names.]] That is: your implementation has to choose whether it wants to go the xml 1.0 or xml 1.1. way; in the later case, just cite Unicode as xml 1.1. does. Regards, Felix.
Received on Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:45:25 UTC