From: Asmus Freytag (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Nov 30 2005 - 14:18:08 CST
On 11/30/2005 9:10 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> From: "Andrew West" <email@example.com>
>> On 30/11/05, Philippe Verdy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> This is Amd2 document published by WG2 that I used. If this is wrong or
>>> useless, then the WG2 website is wrong or useless too.
>> It is not the WG2 website that is wrong or useless.
>> N2936 that you used is the document showing the FPDAM2 charts,
>> published eight months ago on 2005-04-01. Since then Amendment 2 has
>> moved on to the FDAM stage, and a number of changes have been made (as
>> outlined by Asmus). A new document, N2991 was issued 2005-09-14 that
>> shows the FDAM2 charts. This document was mentioned several times in
>> recent discussion on this list, and it is right near the top of the
>> list of documents on the WG2 home page
> I have the recent update: it is not signed by the WG2, but by Asmus
> for the Unicode TC.
As I am the contributing editor for 10646 in charge of code charts, this
is empty quibbling indeed.
Andew has it right.
> It remains that the FPDAM2(E) is the latest draft currently published
> by WG2, and it *effectively* states what is supposed to be changed
> between Unicode 4.1 and Unicode 5.0 (similar statement is not in the
> Asmus revized draft).
The FPDAM2(E) is a proposal that was intended as a source for WG2 member
bodies to make technical comments that would *change* its contents.
After WG2 has reviewed the ballot comments, any further relevance of an
FPDAM document is only historical. It has been superseded.
>>> empty (and I verified this fact). Is there something now ?
>> Yes, Ken Whistler invented a time machine, travelled back in time to
>> 2005-10-25 and planted all the documents which are there today:
> When I sent the file, the beta directory of Unicode 5.0 was still
> And when I sent the email, that folder was *empty* (possibly being
> updated). If it had been there, Michael would of course have not asked
> his question to the list ! And I had verified it before posting.
Perhaps you have issues with proxy servers and caches.... Ken has been
posting files to that location for a while. Hit the reload button?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 30 2005 - 14:19:29 CST