L2/25-184
Source: Editorial Working Group
Date: July 17, 2025
The Editorial Committee continues its review of new content planned for the eventual 17.0 publication of the core specification. In particular, our contributing editors are continuing their review and editing of the following sections, numbered as they will appear in the revised new 17.0 text:
Section 4.5 (General Category), Section 6.2.9 (Other Punctuation), Section 9.3.2 (Syriac Shaping), Section 9.5 (Mandaic), Section 9.6 (Yezidi)
Section 12.2 (Bengali), Section 12.3.1 (Gurmukhi), Section 12.4.1 (Gujarati), Section 12.5 (Oriya), Section 12.6 (Tamil), Section 12.7 (Telugu), Section 12.8 (Kannada), Section 12.9 (Malayalam), Section 13.1 (Thaana)
Section 22.1.1 (Currency Symbols)
Section 13.25 (Chisoi) has been drafted but has been delayed for inclusion in 18.0.
There is also ongoing work to do routine upkeep of the core specification and to stay current with bug reports and other small tweaks to core specification content mandated by the UTC.
Our release schedule can be consulted in this earlier report.
All scripts/blocks are ready for publication.
Certain aspects of the core specification has been postponed to Unicode 18.0:
Revision of Section 12.2 (Bengali)
Revision of Section 12.5 (Oriya)
New Section 13.25 (Chisoi)
The Editorial Working Group continues its periodical review and general maintenance of Unicode web pages, both out of its own initiative and public feedback.
Some light maintenance of the Editorial Working Group's own page has been conducted to better reflect its current composition.
FYI: Public-facing information about the Editorial Working Group and its work is maintained on the Unicode Editorial Working Group Page on the website. The Editorial Working Group also maintains an internal subsite for use by the committee. People who would like to find out more about the work of the Editorial Working Group or contribute to that work should contact the Chair, Louka Ménard Blondin (louka@unicode.org).
The Editorial Working Group continues to meet regularly. Our meetings are generally held on a biweekly schedule, except when holidays or other events coincidence, such as UTC meetings. This report to the UTC includes feedback from the Editorial Working Group meetings held on April 10, 2025, May 8, 2025, May 22, 2025, May 29, 2025, June 5, 2025, June 19, 2025, July 3, 2025, and July 17, 2025.
An additional extraordinary meeting was allocated on May 22, 2025 in order to resolve concerns with how we integrate UAXes into the unified publication framework used by the core specification.
It has been mentioned that the Editorial WG should establish a mechanism for acknowledging feedback submissions to ensure submitters are informed when their comments have been reviewed or processed. However, this need extends to other committees that also receive public input, and it has been noted that such a system could raise privacy considerations, such as the handling of personal information like email addresses.
Consequently, the Editorial WG is currently awaiting the outcome of ongoing discussions for an organization-wide solution for a standardized feedback response mechanism, which is anticipated to address these broader concerns and provide a consistent approach across relevant working groups. In the interim, we respond to feedback submitters informing them that we are taking their feedback into account where possible.
FYI: During this cycle, the Editorial Working Group has been lightly reviewing UAXes and UTSes.
Date/Time: Mon June 09 09:24:22 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250609092422 Name: Allen Watkins Smith Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526: U 17.0.0 Beta (11.4 Egyptian Hieroglyphs)
xIn subsection 11.4.4, the example use in Figure 11-10 of brackets withhieroglyphs has inconsistent format controls shown in the sequence startingwith "L1". First, either it should be "L1 * [" (using '*' for the formatcontrol character), as I suspect is true, or "X1 * [" later in the sequenceshould not have the "*". Second, "Z2 ( V30" (with "(" format controlcharacter substitution) should be "Z2 * ( V30". Third, either the plannedadditional material should (also) explain how brackets (even unpaired)apparently also cause grouping as if parenthetical format controls, or theexample sequence needs further correcting. (The correct sequence may be "( L1 * ( [ D21 : X1 * ( [ Z2 * ( V30 : X1 ) ) ) ) * ]", although I amuncertain due to the necessity of the planned additional material regardingsequencing of format controls; good thinking on adding that!) The codepoint sequence in the paragraph above will also need correcting, and inaddition has a couple of commas missing.The current text of 11.4 is variable (particularly between subsections) inthe use of "hieroglyph(s)" versus "glyph(s)" versus "hieroglyphic character(s)" versus "sign(s)" (or even "hieroglyphic sign", before Figure 11-5). Ifany distinctions are supposed to be made by the term chosen, they are notcommunicating any clear information. For readability, avoidanceof "hieroglyphic character(s)" (or "hieroglyphic sign(s)") when possible ispreferable.It would be nice if, particularly for the sake of professional font(and likely specialized rendering engine) implementers who are not alsoprofessional Egyptologists, there was a convenient listing in this sectionof the hieroglyphs - as images, not code points - used in examples with thecorresponding"L1" or whatever code. (Going back and forth between the charts and thesection is rather irritating. Labels inside the figures would be evennicer, but likely impractical - particularly inside 17.0.0 time limits -given, for instance, the examples in Figure 11-5.)
Action item for Debbie Anderson, EDC: Investigate and update the text as needed. [Reference: Section E1 of L2/25-184].
Date/Time: Sat June 07 03:23:28 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250607032328 Name: Allen Watkins Smith Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI #526: Unicode 17.0.0 Beta (3.5.2, D23)
xxxxxxxxxxUnder 3.5.2 D23, there is an example of possible property values for a specific property, East-Asian_Width. The possible property values given are not correct, which is confusing. According to UAX #11, East Asian Width, the correct possible property valuesare "East_Asian_Fullwidth", "East_Asian_Halfwidth", "East_Asian_Wide", "East_Asian_Narrow", "East_Asian_Ambiguous", and "Neutral".
The Editorial Working Group reviewed this and determined the text in D23 is correct as stated.
Date/Time: Sat June 21 06:37:00 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250621063700 Name: Lydia Trusova Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526: Error in symbol U+131F5)
xxxxxxxxxxThere is an error in symbol 𓇵 U+131F5 from block U+13000–U+1342F in Unicode table. According toGardiner's list, hieroglyph E030 depicts a leopard/panther with key features of a spotted fur, long tail, and feline face.
The Editorial Working Group reviewed this and determined the glyph is correct as shown.
Date/Time: Wed June 25 07:04:13 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250625070413 Name: Marc Lodewijck Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: Suggested reclassification of U+16D98 C
xxxxxxxxxxIn the current draft of NamesList.txt, U+16D98 CHISOI SIGN ANUSVARA appears within the "Letters" section of the Chisoi block. However, this character is not a letter; it is a combining mark used to indicate nasalization.To reflect its actual function and to align with established editorial conventions, I suggest moving U+16D98 into a separate section.Proposed revision:@ Letters16D80 CHISOI LETTER A16D81 CHISOI LETTER BA...16D97 CHISOI LETTER PA@ Nasalization sign16D98 CHISOI SIGN ANUSVARA@ Letters16D99 CHISOI LETTER YA
The Editorial Working Group reviewed this and will take this suggestion into account for development of the NamesList.txt for Unicode 18.0.
FYI: We are taking Chisoi out of Unicode 17.0 and postponing it to Unicode 18.0.
Date/Time: Sun June 29 11:56:05 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250629115605 Name: Marc Lodewijck Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI #526: corrections to section titles
xxxxxxxxxxIn the NamesList.txt file, within the Egyptian Hieroglyphs Extended-A block (U+13460–U+143FF), the following section titles must be corrected.D08. Eye oudjat→ D08. Udjat eyeEye oudjat → Udjat eye — “oudjat” must be corrected to “udjat”, and word order adjusted.D09. Eye oudjat components→ D09. Udjat eye componentsEye oudjat → Udjat eye — “oudjat” must be corrected to “udjat”, with word order adjusted accordingly.F09. Donkey and horse protome→ F09. Donkey and horse protomesprotome → protomes — plural is required.N03. Sun with Uraeus→ N03. Sun with uraeusUraeus → uraeus — lowercase is required.O11. Double platform (sed festival)→ O11. Double platform (sed-festival)sed festival → sed-festival — hyphenation aligns with 15 occurrences of “sed-festival” in Unikemet.txt, and no instance of “sed festival”.T15. Reed float (Object db.)→ ? T15. Reed floatPlease verify whether “(Object db.)” should be included in this section title, as it may be inappropriate.
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed these suggestions, agreed with them, and the changes will appear in the NamesList.txt for Unicode 17.0.
Date/Time: Mon June 30 11:22:05 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250630112205 Name: Marc Lodewijck Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: [PRI #526] Reclassification of U+1E6E3 and U+1E6E6
xxxxxxxxxxIn the current draft of NamesList.txt, two rime signs in the “Tai Yo” block — U+1E6E3 TAI YO SIGN UE and U+1E6E6 TAI YO SIGN AU — are listed under the“Vowels” section.However, according to section 3.2.4 (“Rime signs”) of the Tai Yo script proposal, these are not vowel letters but distinct rime components.Would it not be more accurate to list them under separate “Rime sign” headings, rather than grouping them with vowels, to better reflect their function?Suggested revision:@ Vowels1E6E0 TAI YO LETTER AA1E6E1 TAI YO LETTER I1E6E2 TAI YO LETTER UE+@ Rime sign1E6E3 TAI YO SIGN UE+@ Vowels1E6E4 TAI YO LETTER U1E6E5 TAI YO LETTER AE+@ Rime sign1E6E6 TAI YO SIGN AU+@ Vowels1E6E7 TAI YO LETTER O1E6E8 TAI YO LETTER E1E6E9 TAI YO LETTER IA1E6EA TAI YO LETTER UEA1E6EB TAI YO LETTER UA1E6EC TAI YO LETTER OO1E6ED TAI YO LETTER AUEThe “Finals” section, by contrast, is consistent and appropriate: all characters listed there serve final (coda) functions, regardless of whether theyare represented as letters or signs. Therefore, no further subdivision is needed in that section.
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed this and we will investigate how best to word this subhead in the NamesList.txt.
FYI: The discussion of the mention of Rime signs is best referred to this discussion in the core spec section on Tai Yo where there is more data and context.
Date/Time: Tue July 01 19:42:15 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250701194215 Name: Erik Carvalhal Miller Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526 Unicode 17.0.0 Beta: Core Spec §6.2.4
xxxxxxxxxxCore Spec §6.2.4 “Dashes and Hyphens” ¶1 says, ‘U+2010 ‐ HYPHEN represents the hyphen as found in words such as “left-to-right.” ’; however, the example is confusing and false, since both hyphens are actually instances of U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS (as are, indeed, most of the hyphens in that chapter and throughout the Core Spec generally). Please revise accordingly.
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed this and determined that a correction isn't necessary.
Date/Time: Tue July 01 20:24:31 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250701202431 Name: Erik Carvalhal Miller Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526 Unicode 17.0.0 Beta: Core Spec ch. 6
xxxxxxxxxxCore Spec chapter 6 “Writing Systems and Punctuation” ＞ introductory section ＞ ¶2 headed “Scripts and Blocks”: In the sentence beginning, “Discussion of scripts and other groups of characters are[…]”, “are” → “is” (for subject–verb agreement).
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed this and will make the correction as described.
Date/Time: Tue July 01 20:38:52 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250701203852 Name: Erik Carvalhal Miller Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526 Unicode 17.0.0 Beta: Core Spec chapter 6
xxxxxxxxxxCore Spec §6.1 “Writing Systems” ＞ introductory section ＞ paragraph headed “Abjads”: The first sentence — “A writing system in which only consonants are indicated is an abjad.” — is contradicted by the following sentence at the phrases “or long vowels” and “or optionally indicated[…]”. Possible revision: change first sentence to “A writing system which indicates only or primarily consonants is an abjad.
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed this and while we agree that the sentence needs revision, we will change it to A writing system in which consonant sounds are written, but short vowel sounds are typically omitted instead of the provided suggestion.
Date/Time: Tue July 01 20:59:12 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250701205912 Name: Erik Carvalhal Miller Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526 Unicode 17.0.0 Beta: Core Spec §6.1
xxxxxxxxxxCore Spec §6.1 “Writing Systems” ＞ introductory section ＞ 1st paragraph following paragraph headed “Syllabaries”: The first sentence, beginning, “In syllabaries such as Cherokee, Hiragana, Katakana, and Yi[…]”, has awkward mixing of singular and plural, whereas the use of each suggests singular only. Suggested revision: “any of the consonant(s) or vowels of the syllables” → “any consonant or vowel of the syllable”.
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed this and will change any of the consonant(s) or vowels of the syllables to any of the consonants or vowels of the syllables.
Date/Time: Tue July 01 23:51:41 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250701235141 Name: Erik Carvalhal Miller Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526 Unicode 17.0.0 Beta: Core Spec §5.21.6
xxxxxxxxxxCore Spec §5.21.6 “Characters Ignored for Display” ＞ 3rd paragraph, headed by “Normal Rendering”: In second sentence, “dotted box” → “dashed box”. for consistency with the description of the “Dashed Box Convention” described in §24.1.2 “Special Characters and Code Points”, as well as accuracy (for the representations thus described and used throughout Unicode Standard documentation indeed do have borders made up of dashes, i.e., lines like “- - -”, not of dots, i.e., circles or squares like “· · ·”).
The Editorial Working Group has reviewed this and will make the change as described. We've also identified multiple other places where this must also be changed.
Date/Time: Tue July 08 19:17:26 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250708191726 Name: Erik Carvalhal Miller Report Type: Public Review Issue Opt Subject: PRI 526⁓Unicode 17.0.0 Beta: Core Spec Table 4-10 [EDC]
xxxxxxxxxxChapter 4ʼs table 4-10 (“Unusual Properties”) has not been updated to reflect additional ideographic description characters encoded in v15.1; row“Ideographic description” should list 2FF0‥2FFF & 31EF (instead of just 2FF0‥2FFB).
This has been corrected in Unicode 17.0.
Date/Time: Fri May 30 14:17:22 PDT 2025 ReportID: ID20250530141722 Name: Matthew King Report Type: Report Error in Publication Data Opt Subject: Missing example in figure 2-5
xxxxxxxxxxUnless my PDF viewers are faulty (I tried two on different computers/OSs) Example 5 in figure 2-5, which should be horizontally rendered Japanese text, is missing.It is slightly amusing that the examples read "Please see page 1123" (presumably the other languages which I don't speak say the same thing). Perhaps in review it was misunderstood as an actual reference? Page 1123 does not appear to be relevant.This is in Unicode 16. The other version I happen to have is 14 which does display example 5 correctly. I am unsure about 15.
This has been corrected in Unicode 17.0.
N/A