Early Review of draft-faltstrom-unicode12-00
review-faltstrom-unicode12-00-i18ndir-early-asmus-2021-03-05-00
| Request | Review of | draft-faltstrom-unicode12 |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 07) | |
| Type | Early Review | |
| Team | Internationalization Directorate (i18ndir) | |
| Deadline | 2021-03-07 | |
| Requested | 2021-03-05 | |
| Requested by | Pete Resnick | |
| Authors | Patrik Fältström | |
| Draft last updated | 2021-03-05 | |
| Completed reviews |
I18ndir Early review of -00
by
Asmus, Inc.
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -03 by Russ Housley (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Tim Chown (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Asmus, Inc. |
| State | Completed Snapshot | |
| Review |
review-faltstrom-unicode12-00-i18ndir-early-asmus-2021-03-05
|
|
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i18ndir/ZRAeaRN_X0ONE2EOdgV0BX93XkE | |
| Reviewed revision | 00 (document currently at 07) | |
| Result | Ready with Nits | |
| Completed | 2021-03-05 |
review-faltstrom-unicode12-00-i18ndir-early-asmus-2021-03-05-00
This review based primarily on the diff, with just some look at the full text
of the -01 draft to get the complete context for some items.
(1) The math of code points needs to be reviewed in section 4.3. It appears to
not account for a property change for U+111C9
(2) In Section 5, there's a sentence that seems to have a sense destroying edit:
The code point if being accepted might due ???? to implementations of
IDNA2008 based on older versions of Unicode than 11.0.0 be rejected.
(3) plural noun/verb mismatch in section 6
... new versions [...] is...
(4) Section 8: use of definite article. Drop "the" in front of Unicode Version
(also check other instances)
(5) Usefully, the discussion of SHARADA SANDHI MARK could point out whether it
treated the same or different from other SANDHI marks in related scripts. (From
just looking at the tables, and not the original UCD entries, it looks like
that they are all now treated the same, which would be beneficial under the
"least astonishment" principle - or whatever it's called).
(6) typo: detabase
(7) This progressing subsetting --> "progressive"
(8)typo: "from from" (multiple instances)
(9)typo: "chacters" (multiple instances)
(10) typo: "situtions"
(11) Better wording?
As one can see in Section 3, there is one incompatible change made
between Unicode 6.2.0 and 12.0.0, the code point U+111C9. It has
changed derived property value from DISALLOWED to PVALID.
to
As one can see in Section 3, an incompatible property change was made
between Unicode 6.2.0 and 12.0.0, affecting the code point U+111C9. Its
derived property value thus changed from DISALLOWED to PVALID
(12) IDNA 2008 allow --> IDNA2008 allows
(13) typo: "section Section"