The always disapearing sign CUNEIFOR SIGN U U

From: Frédéric Grosshans <>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 18:30:47 +0200

Le 11/09/2013 21:35, Whistler, Ken a écrit :
> The two currently relevant documents are:
> Draft repertoire for FDAM2 of ISO/IEC 10646:2012 (3rd edition) (WG2 N4458):
> and
> Draft additional repertoire for ISO/IEC 10646:2014 (4th edition) (WG2 N4459)
> The first of those is for an FDAM ballot. That is a non-technical "approval" ballot,
> and that means that it is too late to be commenting on code points or
> character names for that one. Those characters are *already* a done deal,
> and are committed (eventually) for Unicode 7.0.
I have a specific question on the "too late to be commented" n4458 FDAM
document. It concerns cuneiform numbers, and more specifically the
absent CUNEIFORM SIGN U U (aka cuneiform 20)

This "missing" character has been discussed here last year, and Ken
Whistler gave the rational for several related encoding decision here and
stated that the omission of the character was voluntary, citing a
document by Steve Tinney.

Since then, it has been proposed by Steve Tinney and Michael Everson in as
U+12399. Steve Tinney is also author of a page at the ORACC project where this character is
listed in the "stacking patterns need[ing]" to be added to Unicode,
among others which will be added as U+12469 and following.

However, this character 12399 is absent from the ballot, which stops the
additions in the cuneiform block at 12398. What is the rational for
omitting this character ? Stability with "legacy" encoding (i.e.
pre-unicode 7) ?

Received on Thu Sep 12 2013 - 11:32:33 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Sep 12 2013 - 11:32:33 CDT