From: 	kenw@sybase.com[SMTP:kenw@sybase.com]
Sent: 	Friday, April 03, 1998 3:31 PM
To: 	unicore@unicode.org
Cc: 	x3l2@listproc.hcf.jhu.edu; kenw@sybase.com
Subject: 	Summary of WG2 encoding actions
I haven't seen any summary go around yet, so here is my personal
summary of what happened at WG2 (March 16-20, Seattle) that
had the effect of progressing encodings. (None of what I state
here is binding, of course. The "truth" will appear in the
formal record of the WG2 resolutions.)
--Ken
1. Thaana (WG2 N 1699)
   The revised proposal was accepted for progression to PDAM.
   Thaana 50 characters U+0780..U+07B1
2. Syriac (WG2 N 1718)
   The revised proposal (incorporating changes discussed at
   UTC) was accepted for progression to PDAM.
   Syriac 74 characters U+0700..U+074D
3. Khmer and Burmese (WG2 N 1729)
   The work of the Khmer and Burmese Ad-Hoc Meeting was accepted
   for progression to separate PDAM's for Burmese and for Khmer.
   Burmese 84 characters U+1700..U+1759
   Khmer  103 characters U+1780..U+17E9
4. FPDAM Bucket (42 characters)
   A collection of characters was accepted for progression to
   an FPDAM. These characters, and the associated documents are:
   Finnish Romany Characters (WG2 N1619 = L2/98-062) (already
      accepted by UTC) [h with caron]
      2 characters  U+021E, U+021F
   Enclosing screen and enclosing keycap (WG2 N1668R2 = L2/97-206)
      (already accepted by UTC)
      2 characters U+20E2, U+20E3
   Kip Sign (WG2 N1720 = L2/98-061) (already accepted by UTC)
      1 character U+20AD
   Syriac Cross Signs (WG2 N1719) (already accepted in principle
      by UTC)
      2 characters U+2670, U+2671
   IDEOGRAPHIC VARIATION INDICATOR (WG2 N1678) (cf. L2/97-024, not
      yet accepted by UTC)
      1 character  U+303E
   Extended Bopomofo (WG2 N1713R) (not yet considered by UTC)
      24 characters U+31A0..U+31B7
   Modifier Letter tone marks for Minnan and Hakka (WG2 N1713R)
      (not yet considered by UTC)
      2 characters  U+02EA, U+02EB
   Canadian Syllabics additions (WG2 N1655 = L2/97-274)
      (already accepted by UTC)
      8 characters  U+166F..U+1676
5. Modification to Vertical Extension A
   The two duplicate characters (U+4551, U+479E) were removed from the
   set contained in WG2 N1723. (Cf. L2/97-254R) 
   China agreed to produce WG2 N1723R for Amendment #17 PDAM balloting.
   The modified list will have the holes removed and the characters
   moved up. The revised total count of characters is 6582.
   (Warning for crossmapping efforts!)
6. Braille (16), Runic (19), Ogham (20).
   The dispositions of comments were accepted. All 3 now progress to
   2 month DAM balloting.
7. Western Musical Symbols (WG2 N1693 = L2/98-045)
   Accepted in principle for encoding on Plane 1 in 10646-2.
   U-0001D103..U-0001D1D7 (Block U-0001D100..U-0001D1DF).
   (Already accepted by UTC.)
8. Etruscan (WG2 N1580 = L2/97-195)
   Accepted in principle for encoding on Plane 1 in 10646-2.
   39 characters U-00010200..U-00010227.
   (Already accepted in principle by UTC.)
9. Gothic (WG2 N1581 = L2/97-196)
   Accepted in principle for encoding on Plane 1 in 10646-2.
   28 characters U-00010230.. U-0001024B. (Gothic punctuation
   removed by consensus.)
   (Already accepted in principle by UTC.)
10. 10646 Part 2
   The working draft has been introduced (WG2 N1717), with Michel
   Suignard as editor. CD balloting is due May, 1999, with the
   working assumption being that whatever contents of Plane 1 (and
   Plane 14) that are ready for inclusion in the CD will be
   included at that point.
Actions not taken.
1. Enclosing Triangle (L2/98-056) U+20E4 has been accepted by UTC,
   but was not considered at the WG2 meeting.
2. The Mongolian discussion advanced some, but no PDAM has yet been
   authorized. If the discussion proceeds apace, the Chinese delegation
   may press for an FPDAM at the London meeting in September.
3. All other new script proposals were remanded for further discussion,
   including extended Tibetan.
4. The ideographic structure characters were discussed at length.
   (WG2 N1494 = L2/97-026). The latest buzz on these is that they
   are graphic symbols used in descriptive sequences, and are *not*
   to be taken as compositional control characters. Taken this way,
   they would not introduce any formal equivalences into Unicode,
   and would probably be acceptable for encoding.