At 12:13 PM 10/22/97 -0700, you wrote:
>We have asked the corresponding bodies to foresee to change this name via
>the usual practice in the standardisation field i.e. by amendment.
There is an unfortunate misunderstanding here that assumes that
character names in ISO 10646 are open to change. This is not the case.
The names of characters in 10646 are normative, and like the character
positions are inviolate once assigned.
After having made that mistake twice in the early history of 10646,
the consensus of the national bodies represented in WG2 now is that
any name changes have a negative impact on the stability of the standard that
far outweighs any putative benefit. Therefore such request will no longer
be entertained. In glaring cases, a note can be attached to prevent a mis-
identification of the character in question because of a less than perfect name.
The Unicode Consortium (and the member companies it represents) are
fully in support of this policy.
The Unicode Consortium
Unicode liaison to NCITS/L2 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:37 EDT