Re: [I18ndir] [art] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-bray-unichars-04.txt

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 10:49 AM Tim Bray <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hello again.  This draft corrects errors pointed out on these mailing
> lists (thanks!) and goes to some length to address the arguments that
> mentioning the All-Code-Points option is toxic, and that the definition of
> UTF-8 excludes the possibility of surrogates. It relies more strongly on
> the discussions in RFC 9413 (which BTW I hadn’t read except in an early
> draft - I recommend to everyone, it’s really good).
>

Hi,

It all seems correct in general. I'm sure people will keep finding little
mistakes. It's tough not to have those in a document of this sort.

Below are some editorial suggestions. Take em or leave em. :)

---

> Because of the way the Unicode Standard defines the term "Unicode
character", the "set of all Unicode characters" is not always useful for
technical specifications.

Instead:

The phrase "set of all Unicode characters" is not always useful for
technical specifications, because of the way the Unicode Standard defines
"Unicode character".


---

> This comprises all code points that are currently assigned...

Instead:

This subset comprises all code points that are currently assigned...

[really a nit, would always get red ink saying "this what?" in school]

---

> or might in future be assigned,

Intead:

or might be assigned in the future,

---

> For example, the following is a legal JSON document

Instead:

For example, the following is a conforming JSON text

[rationale: match ECMA-404 term, section 6 has "legal JSON Text" as well]

---

> the JSON example above

Instead:

the JSON example in Section 5

[maybe also say "the JSON example" near the end, I sort of lost track, but
it's a nit]

---

> Note that escaping techniques such as those in the JSON example above
cannot be used to circumvent this sort of character-repertoire restriction,

Instead:

Note that escaping techniques such as those in the JSON example above
cannot be used to circumvent the restrictions of a character repertoire,

[rationale: "character repertoire" is not hyphenated elsewhere, and I think
you really want the hyphen after "repertoire", but that's awkward in
English]

---

thanks,
Rob