Re: [I18ndir] draft-bray-unichars-01

[Asmus Freytag <[e-mail]>]

On 8/30/2023 8:29 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
> I'm going to disagree here. The goal of this document is to make it 
> simple for authors to identify code-point repertoires without having 
> to become Unicode experts. I think the explanations we have come up 
> with so far are acceptably clear and rooted in the Standard without 
> needing introduce the “assignable” notion.  Wait till you get a look 
> at the next revision to see if you want to continue to argue this point.

I guess I will have to see what you come up with.

In case this wasn't clear, my purpose in suggesting mentioning some 
categories like "assignable" is to get away from just giving ranges, of 
free-standing claims of "these are useful". If it's not needed for a 
crisp definition, it might still be useful to explain by some other 
means than character ranges why you chose certain code points and what 
your selection effectively means.

Your selection happens to contain "all code points that are currently 
assigned or can be assigned in the future to any character that is not a 
traditional control code, plus three essential control codes."

That's a very concise statement of the "meaning" of your definition and 
I think it would add, rather than subtract, from what your are doing.

A./

PS: for "essential" you could substitute "universally supported".