Network Working Group                                         R. McGowan
Internet-Draft                                                   Unicode
Expires: September 25, 2003                               March 27, 2003


  About Unicode Consortium Procedures, Policies, Stability, and Public
                                 Access
                    draft-rmcgowan-unicode-procs-02

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is NOT offered in accordance
   with Section 10 of RFC2026, and the author does not provide the IETF
   with any rights other than to publish as an Internet-Draft.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
   groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://
   www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 25, 2003.

Abstract

   This memo describes various internal workings of the Unicode
   Consortium for the benefit of participants in the IETF. It is
   intended solely for informational purposes. Included are discussions
   of how the decision-making bodies of the consortium work and what
   their procedures are, as well as information on public access to the
   character encoding & standardization processes.












McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


1. About The Unicode Consortium

   The Unicode Consortium is a corporation. Legally speaking it is a
   "California Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation", organized under
   section 501 C(6) of the Internal Revenue Service Code. [see http://
   www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/bus_info/eo/bus-orgs.html]. As such, it is a
   "business league" not focussed on profiting by sales or production of
   goods and services, but neither is it formally a "charitable"
   organization. It is an alliance of member companies whose purpose is
   to "extend, maintain, and promote the Unicode Standard". To this end,
   the consortium keeps a small office, a few editorial and technical
   staff, World Wide Web presence, and mail-list presence.

   The corporation is presided over by a Board of Directors who meet
   annually. The Board is comprised of individuals who are elected
   annually by the full members for three-year terms. The Board appoints
   Officers of the corporation to run the daily operations.

   Membership in the consortium is open to "all corporations, other
   business entities, governmental agencies, not-for-profit
   organizations and academic institutions" who support the consortium's
   purpose. Formally, one class of voting membership is recognized, and
   dues-paying members are typically for-profit corporations, research
   and educational institutions, or national governments. Each such full
   member sends representatives to meetings of the Unicode Technical
   Committee (see below), as well as to a brief annual Membership
   meeting.
























McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


2. The Unicode Technical Committee

   The Unicode Technical Committee (UTC) is the technical decision
   making body of the consortium. The UTC inherited the work and prior
   decisions of the Unicode Working Group (UWG) that was active prior to
   formation of the consortium in January 1991.

   Formally, the UTC is a technical body instituted by resolution of the
   board of directors. Each member appoints one principal and one or two
   alternate representatives to the UTC. UTC representatives frequently
   do, but need not, act as the ordinary member representatives for the
   purposes of the annual meeting.

   The UTC is presided over by a Chair and Vice-Chair, appointed by the
   Board of Directors for an unspecified term of service.

   The UTC meets 4 to 5 times a year to discuss proposals, additions,
   and various other technical topics. There is no fee for participation
   in the UTC meetings. Meeting agendas are not generally posted to any
   public forum, but meeting dates, locations, and logistics are posted
   well in advance at:

      http://www.unicode.org/timesens/calendar.html

   At the discretion of the UTC chair, meetings are open to
   participation of member and liaison organizations, and to observation
   by others. The minutes of meetings are posted publicly on the Unicode
   Web site:

      http://www.unicode.org/consortium/utc-minutes.html

   Meetings of the UTC are held in North America, frequently in the San
   Francisco Bay Area, where the majority of full members have offices.
   Meetings typically last 3 to 4 full days. Rarely, a portion of a
   meeting will be declared a "closed caucus" for member
   representatives.

   All UTC meetings are held jointly with INCITS Technical Committee L2,
   the body responsible for Character Code standards in the United
   States. They constitute "ad hoc" meetings of the L2 body. Further
   information on L2 is available on the INCITS web page:

      http://www.incits.org








McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


3. Unicode Technical Committee Procedures

   The formal procedures of the UTC are publicly available in a document
   entitled "UTC Procedures" available from the Consortium, and on the
   website:

      http://www.unicode.org/consortium/utc-procedures.html

   Despite the invocation of Robert's Rules of Order, UTC meetings are
   conducted with relative informality in view of the highly technical
   nature of most discussions. Meetings focus on items from a technical
   agenda organized and published by the UTC Chair prior to the meeting.
   Technical items are usually proposals in one of the following
   categories:

   1.  Addition of new scripts

   2.  Addition of new characters or small batches of characters

   3.  Preparation and Editing of Technical Reports and Standards

   4.  Changes in the semantics of specific characters

   5.  Changes to the encoding architecture and forms of use

   (Note: The last category of changes are, of course, rare and not
   undertaken without significant lead time and involvement of
   organizations, such as W3C and IETF, having standards that are likely
   to be affected by such changes and with which the UTC maintains
   liaisons. Changes that affect existing normalizations in particular
   are normally disallowed according to UTC procedures, so that W3C and
   IETF standards which rely on them are not thereby broken. See section
   5 below.)

   Typical outputs of the UTC are:

   1.  The Unicode Standard, major and minor versions

   2.  Unicode Technical Reports

   3.  Stand-alone Unicode Technical Standards

   4.  Formal resolutions

   5.  Liaison statements and instructions to the Unicode liaisons to
       other organizations.

   For each technical item on the meeting agenda, there is a general



McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


   process as follows:

   1.  Introduction by the topic sponsor

   2.  Proposals and discussion

   3.  Consensus statements or formal motions












































McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


4. Unicode Technical Committee Motions

   Technical topics of any complexity never proceed from initial
   proposal to final ratification or adoption into the standard in the
   course of one UTC meeting. The UTC members and presiding officers are
   aware that technical changes to the standard have broad consequences
   to other standards, implementors, and end-users of the standard.
   Input from other organizations and experts is often vital to the
   understanding of various proposals and for successful adoption into
   the standard.

   Technical topics are decided in UTC through the use of formal
   motions, either taken in meetings, or by means of 30-day letter
   ballots. Formal UTC motions are of two types:

   1.  Simple motions

   2.  Precedents

   Simple motions may pass with a simple majority constituting more than
   50% of the qualified voting members; or by a special majority
   constituting 2/3 or more of the qualified voting members.

   Precedents are defined, according to the UTC Procedures as either

      (A) an existing Unicode Policy, or

      (B) an explicit precedent.

   Prececents must be passed or overturned by a special majority.

   Examples of implicit precedents include:

   1.  Publication of a character in the standard

   2.  Published normative character properties

   3.  Algorithms required for formal conformance

   An Explicit Precedent is a policy, procedure, encoding, algorithm, or
   other item that is established by a separate motion saying (in
   effect) that a particular prior motion establishes a precedent.

   The UTC also issues formal committee consensus statements, which are
   tracked and listed like motions in the committee minutes. Consensus
   statements are essentially equivalent to formal motions, except that
   no formal vote is taken. When the committee members are in "broad
   agreement" to a proposal but a vote is not required, a consensus



McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


   statement is usually issued. Such a consensus statement has the
   weight of a motion as far as establishing precedents.

















































McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


5. Unicode Consortium Policies

   Because the Unicode Standard is continually evolving to approach the
   ideal of encoding "all the world's scripts", new characters will
   constantly be added. In this sense, the standard is unstable: in the
   standard's useful lifetime, there may never be a final point at which
   no more characters are added. Realizing this, the consortium has
   adopted certain policies to promote and maintain stability of the
   characters that are already encoded, as well as laying out a Roadmap
   to future encodings.

   The overall policies of the consortium with regard to encoding
   stability are published on the web at this URL:

      http://www.unicode.org/policies

   Deliberations and encoding proposals in the UTC are bound by these
   policies.

   The general effect of the policies may be stated in this way: once a
   character is encoded, it will not be moved or removed and its name
   will not be changed. Any of those actions has the potential for
   causing obsolescence of data, and they are not permitted. The
   canonical combining class and decompositions of characters will not
   be changed in any way that affects normalization. In this sense
   normalization, such as that used for International Domain Naming and
   "early normalization" for use on the World Wide Web, is fixed and
   stable for every character at the time that character is encoded.
   (Any changes that are undertaken because of outright errors in
   properties or decompositions are dealt with by means of an adjunct
   data file so that normalization stability can still be maintained by
   those who need it.)

   Property values of characters, such as directionality for the Unicode
   Bidi algorithm, may be changed in some circumstances. As less-well
   documented characters and scripts are encoded, the exact character
   properties and behavior may not be well known at the time the
   characters are first encoded. As more experience is gathered in
   implementing the newly encoded characters, adjustments in the
   properties may become necessary. This re-working is kept to a
   minimum. New and old versions of the relevant property tables are
   made available on the Consortium's web site.

   Normative and some informative data about characters is kept in the
   Unicode Character Database. The structure of many of these property
   values will not be changed. Instead, when new properties are defined,
   the consortium adds new files for these properties, so as not to
   affect the stability of existing implementations that use the values



McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


   and properties defined in the existing formats and files. The latest
   version of the Unicode Character Database can be reached from this
   URL:

      http://www.unicode.org/ucd














































McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


6. UTC and ISO (WG2 and WG20)

   The character repertoire, names, and general architecture of the
   Unicode Standard are identical to the parallel international standard
   ISO/IEC 10646. Unicode provides additional properties and
   implementation information that ISO/IEC 10646 does not.
   Implementations conformant to Unicode are conformant to ISO/IEC
   10646.

   ISO/IEC 10646 is maintained by the committee ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2,
   which maintains a web presence at:

      http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/

   The WG2 committee is composed of national body representatives to
   ISO. Details of ISO organization may be found at:

      http://www.iso.ch

   Details and history of the relationship between ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2
   and Unicode, Inc. may be found in Appendix C of The Unicode Standard.
   (A PDF rendition of the most recent printed edition of the Unicode
   Standard can be found on the Unicode web site.)

   WG2 shares with UTC the policies regarding stability: WG2 neither
   removes characters nor changes their names once published. Changes in
   both standards are closely tracked by the respective committees, and
   a very close working relationship is fostered to maintain
   synchronization between the standards.

   The Unicode Collation Algorithm (UCA) is one of a small set of other
   independent standards defined and maintained by UTC. It is not,
   properly speaking, part of the Unicode Standard itself, but is
   separately defined in Unicode Technical Standard #10 (UTS #10).
   There is no conformance relationship between the two standards,
   except that conformance to a specific base version of the Unicode
   Standard (e.g., 3.0) is specified in a particular version of a UTS.
   The collation algorithm specified in UTS #10 is intended to remain in
   conformance to ISO/IEC 14651 maintained by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG20, and
   the two organizations maintain a close relationship.











McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


7. Process of Technical Changes to the Unicode Standard

   Changes to The Unicode Standard are of two types: architectural
   changes, and character additions.

   Some architectural changes may not affect ISO/IEC 10646, for example,
   the addition of some informative properties to Unicode. Those
   architectural changes that do affect both standards, such as
   additional UTF formats or allocation of planes, are very carefully
   coordinated by the committees. As always, on the UTC side,
   architectural changes that establish precedents are carefully
   monitored and the above-described rules and procedures are followed.

   Additional characters for inclusion in the The Unicode Standard must
   be approved both by the UTC and by WG2. Proposals for additional
   characters enter the standards process in one of several ways:
   through...

   1.  a national body member of WG2

   2.  a member company or associate of UTC

   3.  directly from an individual "expert" contributor

   The two committees have jointly produced a "Proposal Summary Form"
   that is required to accompany all additional character proposals. It
   may be found online at:

      http://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/form1.html

   Instructions for submitting proposals to UTC may be found online at:

      http://www.unicode.org/pending/proposals.html

   Often, submission of proposals to both committees (UTC and WG2) is
   simultaneous. Members of UTC also frequently forward to WG2 proposals
   that have been initially reviewed by UTC.

   In general, a proposal that is submitted to UTC before being
   submitted to WG2 passes through several stages:

   1.  Initial presentation to UTC

   2.  Review and re-drafting

   3.  Forwarding to WG2 for consideration

   4.  Re-drafting for technical changes



McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


   5.  Balloting for approval in UTC

   6.  Re-forwading and recommendation to WG2

   7.  At least two rounds of international balloting in ISO

   About two years are required to complete this process. Proposals of
   any type are almost never directly approved by UTC on first viewing,
   but are usually sent back to the submitters. Repertoire addition
   proposals that are submitted to WG2 before Unicode are generally
   forwarded immediately to UTC through committee liaisons. The crucial
   parts of the process (steps 5 through 7 above) are never
   short-circuited. Two-thirds majority in UTC is required for approval
   at step 5.

   Proposals for additional scripts are required to be coordinated with
   relevant user communities. Often there are ad-hoc subcommittees of
   UTC or expert mail list participants who are responsible for actually
   drafting proposals, garnering community support, or representing user
   communities.

   The rounds of international balloting (steps 7) have participation
   both by UTC and WG2, though UTC does not directly vote in the ISO
   process.

   Occasionally a proposal approved by one body is considered too
   immature for approval by the other body, and may be blocked de-facto
   by either of the two. Only after both bodies have approved the
   additional characters do they proceed to the rounds of international
   balloting. (The first round is a draft international standard during
   which some changes may occur, the second round is final approval
   during which only editorial changes are made.)

   This process assures that proposals for additional characters are
   mature and stable by the time they appear in a final international
   ballot.















McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


8. Public Access to the Character Encoding Process

   While Unicode, Inc, is a membership organization, and the final say
   in technical matters rests with UTC, the process is quite open to
   public input and scrutiny of processes and proposals. There are many
   influential individual experts and industry groups who are not
   formally members, but whose input to the process is taken seriously
   by UTC.

   Internally, UTC maintains a mail list called the "Unicore" list,
   which carries traffic related to meetings, technical content of the
   standard, and so forth. Members of the list are UTC representatives;
   employees and staff of member organizations (such as the Research
   Libraries Group); individual liaisons to and from other standards
   bodies (such as WG2 and IETF); and invited experts from institutions
   such as the Library of Congress and some universities. Subscription
   to the list for external individuals is subject to "sponsorship" by
   the corporate officers.

   Unicode, Inc. also maintains a public discussion list called the
   "Unicode" list. Subscription is open to anyone, and proceedings of
   the "Unicode" mail list are made public via FTP on an occasional
   basis. Details are located at:

      http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html

   All technical proposals for changes to the standard are posted to
   both of these mail lists on a regular basis. Discussion on the public
   list is also monitored by many members of UTC, and frequently the
   results of these public discussions are brought up later at UTC
   meetings. All technical issues and other standardization "events" of
   any significance, such as beta releases and availablility of draft
   documents, are announced and then discussed in this public forum,
   well before standardization is finalized.

   Anyone may make a character encoding or architectural proposal to
   UTC. Membership in the organization is not required to submit a
   proposal. To be taken seriously, the proposal must be framed in a
   substantial way, and be accompanied by sufficient documentation to
   warrant discussion. Examples of proposals are easily available by
   following links from the "Proposed Characters" heading available at
   the Unicode web site. The main proposal page is at:

      http://www.unicode.org/unicode/alloc/Pipeline.html

   (Guidelines for proposals are given at the web location mentioned in
   the previous section.)




McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft       Unicode Consortium Procedures            March 2003


   In general, proposals are publicly aired on the "Unicode" mail list,
   sometimes for a long period, prior to formal submission. Generally
   this is of benefit to the proposer as it tends to reduce the number
   of times the proposal is sent back for clarification or with requests
   for additional information. Once a proposal reaches the stage of
   being ready for discussion by UTC, the proposer will have received
   contact through the public mail list with one or more UTC members
   willing to explain or defend it in a UTC meeting.











































McGowan                Expires September 25, 2003              [Page 14]