Re: [Json] Unpaired surrogates in JSON strings

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 6/5/13 10:29 PM, "John Cowan" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>Carsten Bormann scripsit:
>>
>>> Code points can refer to those of the characters or those of the code
>>> units (byte for UTF-8, etc.).
>>
>>Code points are (mathematical) integers corresponding to Unicode
>>characters, though not all of them are assigned to characters.
>
> The intro to the Unicode standard makes this pretty clear:
>
> http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.2.0/ch01.pdf
>
>
> This is why I wanted to decouple from a particular version of Unicode.  If
> the reference remained at version 4, for example, the word "character"
> means that any code point not in that version of Unicode is not
> technically legal JSON (although we know it will interop just fine in
> practice, which is why it's pretty safe to do the update).

We already know to allow the user of unassigned code points.  We can't
avoid having a normative reference to a Unicode version, if that was
your goal.

Nico
--