Re: Unicode Emoji 5.0 characters now final

From: Philippe Verdy <verdy_p_at_wanadoo.fr>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:01:47 +0200

I just filed the bug in the CLDR contact form.

2017-03-28 12:49 GMT+02:00 Mark Davis ☕️ <mark_at_macchiato.com>:

> ​Thanks. Probably best as:
>
> unicode_locale_id = unicode_language_id
> ( transformed_extensions unicode_locale_extensions?
> | unicode_locale_extensions transformed_extensions? )?
> ;​
>
> even clearer would be two steps:
>
> unicode_locale_id = unicode_language_id extensions? ;
>
> extensions = transformed_extensions unicode_locale_extensions?
> | unicode_locale_extensions transformed_extensions? ;
>
> ​Could you file a CLDR ticket on this?
>
> ​
> Mark
>
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p_at_wanadoo.fr>
> wrote:
>
>> I note this in TR32
>> *3.2 Unicode Locale Identifier
>> <http://unicode.org/reports/tr35/index.html#Unicode_locale_identifier>*
>>
>> EBNF
>> ABNF
>>
>> unicode_locale_id
>> <http://unicode.org/reports/tr35/index.html#unicode_locale_id> =
>> unicode_language_id
>> (transformed_extensions
>> unicode_locale_extensions?
>> | unicode_locale_extensions?
>> transformed_extensions?) ; = unicode_language_id
>> ([trasformed_extensions
>> [unicode_locale_extensions]]
>> / [unicode_locale_extensions
>> [transformed_extensions]])
>>
>> * first there's a typo in the ABNF syntax ("trasformed")
>> * the syntax is not strictly equivalent, or the ABNF is unnecessarily not
>> context-free
>>
>> It should better be:
>>
>> EBNF
>> ABNF
>>
>> unicode_locale_id
>> <http://unicode.org/reports/tr35/index.html#unicode_locale_id> =
>> unicode_language_id
>> (transformed_extensions
>> unicode_locale_extensions?
>> | unicode_locale_extensions
>> transformed_extensions?)?; = unicode_language_id
>> [transformed_extensions
>> [unicode_locale_extensions]
>> / unicode_locale_extensions
>> [transformed_extensions]]
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-03-28 11:56 GMT+02:00 Joan Montané <joan_at_montane.cat>:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-03-28 7:57 GMT+02:00 Mark Davis ☕️ <mark_at_macchiato.com>:
>>>
>>>> To add to what Ken and Markus said: like many other identifiers, there
>>>> are a number of different categories.
>>>>
>>>> 1. *Ill-formed: *"$1"
>>>> 2. *Well-formed, but not valid: *"usx". Is *syntactic* according to
>>>> http://unicode.org/reports/tr51/proposed.html#def_emoji_tag_sequence
>>>> <http://unicode.org/reports/tr51/proposed.html#def_emoji_tag_sequence>,
>>>> but is not *valid* according to http://unicode.org/reports/tr5
>>>> 1/proposed.html#valid-emoji-tag-sequences
>>>> <http://unicode.org/reports/tr51/proposed.html#valid-emoji-tag-sequences>
>>>> .
>>>> 3. *Valid, but not recommended: "usca". *Corresponds to the valid
>>>> Unicode subdivision code for California according to
>>>> http://unicode.org/reports/tr51/proposed.html#valid-emoji-ta
>>>> g-sequences
>>>> <http://unicode.org/reports/tr51/proposed.html#valid-emoji-tag-sequences>
>>>> and CLDR, but is not listed in http://unicode.org/Public/emoji/5.0/.
>>>> 4. *Recommended:* "gbsct". Corresponds to the valid Unicode
>>>> subdivision code for Scotland, and *is* listed in
>>>> http://unicode.org/Public/emoji/5.0/
>>>> <http://unicode.org/Public/emoji/5.0/>.
>>>>
>>>> As Ken says, the terminology is a little bit in flux for term
>>>> 'recommended'. TR51 is still open for comment, although we won't make any
>>>> changes that would invalidate http://unicode.org/Public/emoji/5.0/.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just two remarks
>>>
>>> 1st one: point 4 (Unicode subdivision codes listed in emoji Unicode
>>> site) arises something like chicken-egg problem. Vendors don't easily add
>>> new subdivision-flags (because they aren't recommended), and Unicode
>>> doesn't recommend new subdivision flags (because they aren't supported by
>>> vendors).
>>>
>>> 2n one: What about "Adopt a Character" (AKA "Adopt an emoji"). Will be
>>> valid, but not recommended, Unicode subdivisions codes eligible? For
>>> instances, say, could someone adopt California, Texas, Pomerania, or
>>> Catalonia flags?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Joan Montané
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Tue Mar 28 2017 - 06:02:22 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Mar 28 2017 - 06:02:22 CDT