Skip to content

Conversation

@aphillips
Copy link
Member

Fixes #640

aphillips and others added 2 commits February 13, 2024 15:37
Co-authored-by: Mark Davis <mark@unicode.org>
@aphillips aphillips requested a review from macchiati February 13, 2024 23:58
aphillips and others added 3 commits February 14, 2024 07:28
Co-authored-by: Tim Chevalier <tjc@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Eemeli Aro <eemeli@mozilla.com>
Co-authored-by: Eemeli Aro <eemeli@mozilla.com>
Copy link
Collaborator

@catamorphism catamorphism left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@aphillips aphillips added Action-Item Action item assigned by the WG specification Issue affects the specification LDML45 labels Feb 14, 2024
to the data model that would result in a data model representation
based on this version being invalid.

> For example, existing interfaces or fields will not be removed.
Copy link
Collaborator

@stasm stasm Feb 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about changes to the existing fields and interfaces?

IIUC, this parts says that if we ever un-reserve, say, the % sigil, we will also need to keep it on the list of sigils inside UnsupportedAnnotation:

interface UnsupportedAnnotation {
  type: "unsupported-annotation";
  sigil: "!" | "%" | "^" | "&" | "*" | "+" | "<" | ">" | "?" | "~";
  source: string;
}

Otherwise, (i.e. if we remove % from the list), data model representations produced by older implementations will not be valid.


What was the reason for including the sigil field in UnsupportedAnnotation? Could we move the sigil into the source?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point. Including it in the source string would be a better choice for future compatibility.

@aphillips aphillips merged commit 2891433 into main Feb 15, 2024
@aphillips aphillips deleted the aphillips-data-model-stability branch February 15, 2024 16:31
@eemeli eemeli added this to the LDML 45 milestone Jul 23, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Action-Item Action item assigned by the WG specification Issue affects the specification

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

add data model to stability policy

7 participants