Re: Hangul relocation

From: Masayuki TOYOSHIMA (
Date: Mon Sep 04 1995 - 06:54:09 EDT

What follows is a reproduction of the ballot by the JISC SC2
(The National Body of Japan) on the Hangul relocation in the
ISO/IEC 10646-1.

The text has been provided by and approved for distribution on
the Unicode-ML by the JISC SC2 chair prof. Koji SHIBANO

---------------------------------- cut here ---------------
Ballot on PDAM 5 of UCS

The National Body of Japan disapproves the ISO/IEC PDAM no.5 to
N1209) with the following comments.

----- Comments regarding Procedures and General Principle-----

Comment Number:G-1
Qualifier: Procedural
Comment:NP approval or approval of subdivision of existing
        project is necessary
Rationale:This is substantive change on existing International
        Standard (Refer to Seoul meeting minutes, same proposal
        has been rejected because this is substantive change)
Proposed Solution:At least simultaneous letter ballot with PDAM
        document is necessary, the simultaneous ballot does not
        cause any delay of the PDAM provision.

Comment Number:G-2
Comment:Even though additional characters has different name from
        existing Hangul, reality is nothing more than duplicated
        coding. Avoid duplicated coding.
Rationale: Duplicated coding should not be allowed in ISO/IEC
Proposed Solution:Do not add Hangul syllables that are already in
        ISO/IEC 10646-1

Comment Number:G-3
Clause: Section B
Comment:Removal of characters out from existing code table shall
        not be done.
Proposed Solution:Do not add Hangul syllables that are already in
        ISO/IEC 10646-1, and do withdraw Section B of PDAM no.5
        to ISO/IEC 10646-1

Comment Number:G-4
Comment:Ordering reason for the duplicated coding is not
Rationale:The character mapping principle of ISO/IEC 10646-1 is
        independent from ordering of characters in it.
Proposed Solution:Do not add Hangul syllables that are already in
        ISO/IEC 10646-1.

Comment Number:G-5
Comment:Do not change character names as a reality. Even though
        it looks like adding new characters and deleting
        existing characters (which have different names), reality
        is nothing more than change of character names.
Rationale:Character names shall not be changed
Proposed Solution:Do not add Hangul syllables that are already in
        ISO/IEC 10646-1

-------Comment regarding Implication of this PDAM--------

Comment Number: I-1
Qualifier:Implication review
Comment:This PDAM has a possibility of inhibiting future addition
        of repertoire to BMP. The addition of such a large
        characters has to be approved after review with all other
        repertoire addition requests.
Rationale:This PDAM and Reservation of O-zone space for future
        needs (SC2WG2 N1140) occupy all of O-zone space. There
        this means no large code space available within BMP until
        Section B of PDAM no.5 is effective. On the other hand,
        SC2WG2 N1178,1179 indicate a requirement of large code
        space for CJK characters. In addition to that, SC2WG2
        N1241 lists many other requirements of characters such as
        2000 ea. of Indo-European, 220 ea. of Byzantine musical
        symbols, Tibetan, Mongolian,Yi and so on. It is better to
        review all of those requirements before prohibiting them
        to be mapped in BMP by accident.
Proposed Solution:Priority review is necessary, and consider to
        map PDAM no,5 characters on to other than BMP if it is

-----------------Technical comments--------------

Comment Number: T-1
Qualifier: Technical
Clause:Section A, Page 8, Clause 12
Comment:Reasoning of this amendment is not acceptable
Proposed Solution:Delete all text
Rationale:This reasoning does not justify this amendment at all.
        If this practice is accepted, then other countries may
        make major revisionof National Standard every time their
        request for ISO/IEC 10646 is rejected (revision shortly
        after publication of International Standard like this
        case, in particular, should be avoided) leave room for
        future amendment for other reason(s).

Comment Number:T-2
Clause:Section A, Page 12, Clause 19
       Section A, Page 15, figure 3
       Section A, Page 700, Annex A
       Section A, Page 709, Annex E
       Section B, Page 12, Clause 19
       Section B, Page 15, figure 3
       Section B, Page 700, Annex A
       Section B, Page 709, Annex E
Comment:Block name shall not be changed
Proposed Solution:Leave current block name as it is, and assign
        new block name for additional Hangul.
Rationale:Block name may be already used for SELECTED SUBSETTING
        and other purposes. In principle, block name should be
        handled as same as character names in term of changing.

Comment Number:T-3
Clause:Section C
Comment:Character name in sample page is not acceptable
Proposed Solution:Add annotation onto each character.
        Rationale:The character name in Section C is per ISO CD
        11941.3. (Transliteration of Korean script (Hanguel) into
        Latin characters, Document number ISO TC46/SC2 N335).
        The CD ballot was failed, and resolved to publish
        Technical Report.
        The TR is not published yet, but it was agreed that the
        TR will include two transliteration proposals. It is
        not wise thing to use the rejected proposal as it is in
        another ISO/IEC standard. As a compromise (like wise TR
        mentioned above), It would be better to add another
        transliteration as an annotation.(If ISO/IEC JTC1 SC2 WG2
        believes that even two names might invite political
        difficulty, it would be better to use new naming
        independent from ISO CD 11941 discussions)

Comment Number:T-4
Clause:not on the PDAM
Comment:Add new normative annex to show relation between existing
        Hangul and new added Hangul
Rationale:For easy migration, it is necessary to add normative
        annex which describes mapping between existing Hangul and
        added Hangul.

Comment Number:T-5
Clause:not on the PDAM
Comment:Add new informative annex for conversion tool from
        current ISO/IEC 10646-1 to new ISO/IEC 10646-1.
Rationale:While SC2 WG2 meeting #27 in Geneva, it was committed
        to provide "conversion tool" for relieving existing
        implementation in new coding. Since the conversion is not
        easy business, it is not possible to accept the proposal
        without reviewing the proposed conversion tool(s).
        Remember that simple conversion table normally does not
        work enough. If the tool does not fit (informative)
        annex, then separated contribution document(s) must be
        provided for this pdam review.

----------Editorial comments---------

Comment Number:E-1
Qualifier:Significant editorial
Clause:Section A, page 15, figure 3
Comment:Instead of wording, provide real figure 5 for review
        before voting
Rationale:Impact of this amendment on code space allocation on
        over all ISO/IEC 10646-1 should be much clearer for all
        reviewers of this amendment.
Comment Number:E-2
Qualifier:Minor editorial
Clause:Section A, Page 751, Annex L
Comment:Korea to be Korean
Remarks:This might be handled as a part of COR already

Comment Number:E-3
Qualifier:Significant editorial
Clause:Section C
Comment:Final proposed table should be provided for review before
Rationale:SC2WG2 has experienced many mistakes on edition of
        tables in the past. It is necessary to review full real
        page of table before voting approval or disapproval.

---------------------------------- cut here ---------------

Masayuki TOYOSHIMA / dept. of Japanese linguistics, Faculty of Letters,
Hokkaido university, Sapporo 060 Japan /

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:32 EDT