L2/98-298

September 10, 1998

TITLE: Liaison statement on L2 recommendations re applications for registration

SOURCE: NCITS/L2

STATUS: Liaison statement

ACTION: For the consideration of ISO/TC 46/SC 4

Attachments:

At its meeting in July, NCITS/L2 evaluated a number of applications for character set registration, most of which were for character sets developed by ISO/TC 46/SC 4. We wish to explain to ISO/TC 46/SC 4 and to its Working Group 1 exactly why we voted to disapprove those registrations.

L2 felt that what should be submitted for registration is the character set as published, not a surrogate that departs substantially from the original. The SC2 registry is a repository of character sets that have been registered according to SC2 procedures. One function of a repository is to be able to supply an exact copy of what is referenced by the registration. A version of a character set with redrawn images and completely different character names is not the same as the standard that was published by ISO and is the subject of the registration.

L2 was particularly concerned at the renaming of characters, for two reasons:

• Changes in character names should be done through revision of the standard, not when it is registered. There was no evidence that the renaming of the characters had been sanctioned by ISO/TC 46/SC 4.
• Assignment of an ISO/IEC 10646 name implies identity between the character in the source standard and an UCS character. Mappings that establish such identity should have extensive review by interested parties, and should not be promulgated via the registration process.

The mappings in the registrations included errors (documented in L2/98-285). Of particular concern were different mappings for four characters common to ISO 5426:1980 and ANSI/NISO Z39.47:1993 (Application for Registration No. 225, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2 N 3138). Allowing these discrepant mappings to be established via registration would create havoc for libraries world-wide.

Four already-registered standards were resubmitted. L2 assumed that this was an error on the part of the National Body of Ireland. The prior registration of these sets was not caught by SC2 because the published standards (where the escape sequences for the Gx sets are specified) were not submitted for registration.

Given the defects in what was submitted for registration, L2 had no choice but to vote to disapprove. If the standards as published had been submitted for registration, only Comment A – The US is generally opposed to further registrations of 7 and 8 bit character sets – would have applied. Whether L2 would have made an exception to accommodate the immediate needs of libraries is a moot point.

L2 is aware that libraries world-wide want to implement ISO/IEC 10646 as rapidly as possible. On that point, we are in complete accord, and Comment A is directed towards this end.