New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

JP22: maybe typo? #90

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@YosAwed
Copy link

YosAwed commented Oct 19, 2015

"collection 10646" is unclear for reader.

@rwaldron

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

rwaldron commented Oct 19, 2015

There are no changes here.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bterlson commented Oct 19, 2015

Probably supposed to be an issue not a pull request? The offending text is in clause 2. I have no idea what "If the adopted ISO/IEC 10646-1 subset is not otherwise specified, it is presumed to be the Unicode set, collection 10646" means or is intended to clarify...

@anba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

anba commented Oct 19, 2015

In ISO/IEC 10646:2014, the collection matching Unicode 5.1 is named "collection 308 UNICODE 5.1". So I guess "collection 10646" should be changed to "collection 308" in clause 2.

@allenwb

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

allenwb commented Oct 19, 2015

That language originally came from @NorbertLindenberg, I suspect @anba is correct, but I might be a good idea to verify with Norbert.

@YosAwed

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

YosAwed commented Oct 19, 2015

Thank you for your response. It should write as issue, not pull request. Since I never see the wording "collection 10646", so I proposed to modification. I support @anba 's proposal.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bterlson commented Oct 19, 2015

I think I'll just make @anba's suggested update. If Norbert wants to suggest different wording later he may!

@NorbertLindenberg

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

NorbertLindenberg commented Oct 19, 2015

Collection 10646 is defined in ISO 10646, just a few lines down from collection 308. It allows for the entire code space of Unicode except for non-characters, with no restriction based on Unicode versions.

If this causes confusion, I'd suggest removing it entirely. De facto, ECMA-262 imposes no restrictions on the contents of string values, and where it interprets the contents of strings or source code, it does so based on the Unicode Standard, not based on ISO 10646. I think the references to ISO 10646 exist primarily to smooth promotion from ECMA-262 to ISO 16262; they don't add any normative value.

@bterlson

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bterlson commented Oct 19, 2015

Well that was fast. Thanks @NorbertLindenberg! I'll just remove the verbage entirely unless @YosAwed disagrees.

@YosAwed

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

YosAwed commented Oct 20, 2015

I agree to remove it entirely.

@anba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

anba commented Oct 20, 2015

Collection 10646 is defined in ISO 10646, just a few lines down from collection 308.

Thanks for the clarification! I've missed its definition in ISO/IEC 10646:2014 Annex A.1, and Annex A.6 only includes collections 303-314.

@bterlson bterlson closed this in 55650cf Oct 21, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment