Re: Relationship between Unicode and 10646

From: Kenneth Whistler (
Date: Tue Nov 30 2004 - 15:56:44 CST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Relationship between Unicode and 10646"


    > This was in fact my question: will the amendment be
    > passed automatically if there is a majority in favour, or does it go
    > back for further discussion until a consensus is reached? You have
    > clarified that the latter is true. And I am glad to hear it.

    The relevant applicable clauses from the JTC 1 Directives are:


    9.1.6 JTC 1 and its SCs shall pay special attention to negative
          votes by P-members and shall attempt as far as possible
          to resolve the underlying differences and achieve the maximum
          level of approval.
    9.4.3 Consideration of successive CDs/PDAMs/PDISPs/PDTRs (types 2
          and 3) shall continue until the substantial support of the
          P-members of the committee has been obtained or a decision
          to abandon or defer the project has been reached.
    Note that the terms "maximum level of approval" and "substantial
    support" are deliberately left vague, to give the SCs the
    room to garner what consensus they can, in the process of
    working through revision of documents under ballot.

    These procedures are used by dozens of SCs and their WGs in
    JTC 1, and there is nothing peculiar or distinct in the way
    they are applied in SC2/WG2 as regards ISO/IEC 10646 -- except
    perhaps for the amount of heated discussion that individual
    characters or scripts incorporated into amendments for
    10646 sometimes garners.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 15:57:39 CST