Re: [Last-Call] Opsdir last call review of draft-faltstrom-unicode12-03

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Sunday, November 28, 2021 14:52 +0100 Patrik Fältström
<paf=[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 16 Nov 2021, at 14:38, Tim Chown via Datatracker wrote:
> 
>> I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational
>> directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents
>> being processed by the IESG.  These comments were written
>> with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the
>> IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may
>> be included in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document
>> editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like
>> any other last call comments.
> 
> Here are my comments on these.
>...

>> The draft discusses changes up to Unicode 12.0.0, but I see
>> that Unicode 14.0.0 was recently published; should the
>> changes made in those past 2 years be included in this
>> document?   Are they major, or minor, to readily allow this?
> 
> As explained in last sentences of Section 1, review of
> versions after 12.0.0 is to be made according to RFC 8753, and
> this document ensures we can do a proper such review of
> versions after version 12.0.0.
>...

Two observations, fwiw...

* I think this document is vastly improved with the recently
posted -04 version.  I'm sure that various of us (myself
included) could suggest further small improvements, but their
potential value would almost certainly be outweighed by the
advantages of just getting this finished and published,
something that almost certainly should have been done two years
ago.  As the text explains adequately, covering version-specific
issues in Section 3, this document is a catch-up job from
Unicode 6.0 in RFC 6452 (November 2011 -- a full ten years) to
Unicode 11.0.  It then incorporates a second catch-up job from
the very carefully reviewed but never published Unicode 11.0
version (draft-faltstrom-unicode11) to cover Unicode 12.0.  I
can see no way to write the document to cover that process that
would be much more clear, at least without making it far longer
(which would interfere with utility even if not with clarity).

*  While I don't think it has anything to do with whether this
document should be published, I hope the community understands
that RFC 8753 is a commitment by the IETF, reinforced by this
document, to do future reviews (including the ones to bring us
current with Unicode 14) according to the principles that were
anticipated in RFCs 5890-5894 and to do them in a timely
fashion.   For those who don't know, that original process was
partially bypassed in all of the reviews that were done between
Unicode 5.2 and the present document (inclusive).    RFC 8753
explains and clarifies that original model, including explaining
why it is important to reinstate it.  So, while I believe this
document should be published whether we have a plan going
forward or not, I hope we will soon see a plan in the very near
future so this document does not end up acting as a tombstone on
IDNA2008 reviews of changes introduced by new Unicode versions.

best,
   john