Re: comments on draft-yergeau-utf8-rev2-00

[David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Francois Yergeau wrote:
> What about this:
> 
>    [UNICODE]      The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard --
>                   Version 3.2",  defined by The Unicode Standard,
>                   Version 3.0 (Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 2000. ISBN
>                   0-201-61633-5), as amended by the Unicode Standard
>                   Annex #27: Unicode 3.1 (see http://www.unicode.org/
>                   reports/tr27) and by the Unicode Standard Annex #28:
>                   Unicode 3.2 (see http://www.unicode.org/reports/
>                   tr28)., March 2002, <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/
>                   standard/versions/
>                   enumeratedversions.html#Unicode_3_2_0>.

I suggest:

[UNICODE] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard", Versions 2.0 and
later. <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions/>.

[UNICODE-3-2] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version 3.2",
defined by [UNICODE-3-0] as amended by [UAX27] and [UAX28].
<http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions/enumeratedversions.html
#Unicode_3_2_0>.

[UNICODE-3-0] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version 3.0",
Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 2000. ISBN 0-201-61633-5.

[UAX27] The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Standard Annex #27: Unicode 3.1",
May 2001. <http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr27>.

[UAX28] The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Standard Annex #28: Unicode 3.2",
March 2002. <http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr28>.


References in the draft that specify the character repertoire should be to
[UNICODE] (note that 2.0 is the first version after the Korean mess), and
references for the purpose of defining UTF-8 should be to [UNICODE-3-2]
(since Unicode 3.2 gives the most up-to-date definition of UTF-8).

- -- 
David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>

Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/
RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5  0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01
Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a
public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been
seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBPLzcdjkCAxeYt5gVAQH19wf/VTN5Hq2jvEGGXRASFhwWdCvjVMlFFy9d
JG+C+Pe2gxwTtzZVrmkdqkOuXBrS78CBxkp6yaTlwr0gMTbIiD3tx5jRAcc+yNBk
dTqaCiIJ4ypUHLvUwLpNxbfQhZ3kHH9VpirYI7itEFrWXv6GZ1f7g3QaCQ7SjzhV
b46qK5mi7x57yAD61GcLteqAbXkRqveYrRTzE/R0rvNjpyA8oHKdngQ1haHPp2+d
Aim4itXva0ClRW5t1DRvADDcsS4iZu8BDgreD4ffwCGOcc/YKUAM4abG0o8T2wMV
8qxb4iD2D+JAPiVIalo7NVaIMUHQ2BWhm6bykxWVdVchbT9t9datzg==
=dWHl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----