L2/14-259 Title: WG2 Consent Docket Author: Ken Whistler and Debbie Anderson Date: October 21, 2014 Action: For consideration by UTC WG2 #63 met in Colombo, Sri Lanka from September 29 to October 3, 2014. During that meeting a number of recommendations were agreed to for the PDAM 2.2 of the 4th Edition. See WG2 N4604 (=L2/14-XXX) for the full details of all the recommendations. As usual, in this consent docket, we summarize just the parts of the actions taken by WG2 which result in a different status between WG2 and the UTC regarding various character approvals. These are the differences where the UTC needs to make some decision regarding how to synchronize approvals (or to oppose a proposed change). Note that the pipeline page: http://www.unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html has already been updated to reflect changes in approvals by WG2, and to highlight differences from the current approvals by the UTC, so that page can be useful in following the discussion below on the individual issues. =========================================================================== DAM 1 to the 4th Edition Amendment 1 to the 4th Edition passed the DAM ballot. Since it received no negative votes, the amendment proceeded straight to publication, bypassing an FDAM ballot. The content will appear in Unicode 8.0. The full listing of the additional repertoire in the DAM 1 ballot can be seen in WG2 N4568 (= L2/14-078). Comment: There were no repertoire changes resulting from the DAM 1 ballot. There were a few editorial corrections, but they do not need to be called out here. =========================================================================== Changes Related to PDAM 2 to the 4th Edition The PDAM 2 to the 4th Edition has gone for a second PDAM ballot. With regard to synchronization, Amendment 2 should align with Unicode 9.0 (in 2016). Note that some parts of the PDAM 2 repertoire could be accelerated for publication into Unicode 8.0 (in 2015), depending on what happens during future ballot resolutions. The full listing of the additional repertoire for PDAM2.2 can be seen in WG2 N4XXX (= L2/14-XXX). [draft repertoire doc] A. Tangut Ideographs WG2 agreed to the addition of one Tangut character, U+17132, as well as numerous glyph corrections (and subsequent character re-ordering). See WG2 N4588. Recommendation: Approve the character addition, reordering, and glyph corrections. Comments: The Tangut repertoire seems to have been carefully reviewed by China, based on their ballot comments (WG2 N4649 Disposition of Comments). B. Tangut Radicals WG2 had consensus on the addition of Tangut Radicals, based on WG2 N4636 (L2/14-228). The UTC has not yet reviewed this large repertoire, though it was known to be coming. Recommendation: Discuss and decide what to do. C. Mongolian WG2 agreed on the allocation of a new block, MONGOLIAN SUPPLEMENT (U+11660..U+1167F), for the Mongolian birgas. The 5 birgas which the UTC approved at U+181A..U+181E in the Mongolian block were moved to the new block in the positions U+11660..U+11664, and 8 new birgas were added in the positions U+11665..U+1166C (see WG2 N4632). The new descriptive names are shown in the PDAM 2.2 draft repertoire WG2 N4XXX: 11660 MONGOLIAN BIRGA WITH ORNAMENT … 1166C MONGOLIAN TURNED SWIRL BIRGA WITH DOUBLE ORNAMENT Recommendation: Discuss and decide what to do. Comments: Note that the two unreconciled positions here represent a disagreement about the encoding model for the birgas in Mongolian. D. Tamil WG2 agreed to move 6 Tamil archaic characters from U+0BDF, U+0BFB..U+0BFF in the Tamil block to U+11FF0..U+11FF5 in the Tamil Supplement block to accommodate comments from Sri Lanka and Ireland. Recommendation: Approve the move. Comments: This satisfied Sri Lanka, which didn’t actually submit ballot comments on this item. Only Ireland submitted a relevant ballot comment. The UTC agendas/minutes don't appear to have any record of the UTC responding to this request from ICTA (L2/14-048). Shriramana’s response only showed up in September (L2/14-217 = WG2 N4623), so it wasn’t seen at the last UTC. E. Zanabazar Square Based on UK’s ballot comments (see WG2 N4649), WG2 agreed to rename the character at U+11A29 from ZANABAZAR SQUARE LETTER SMALL A to ZANABAZAR SQUARE LETTER –A. Recommendation: Approve the name change for the character. Comment: This request brings the name of this character in line with the corresponding characters in Tibetan and Marchen. F. Nushu WG2 agreed to moving U+1B100 NUSHU REPETITION MARK to U+16FE1 in the Ideographic Symbols and Punctuation block, and renamed it to NUSHU ITERATION MARK. As a result of this move, the entire Nushu block was shifted up one code position, so the characters in the block now run from U+1B100..U+1B28B. Recommendation: Discuss and decide whether it is ready to approve any Nushu characters. G. Osage WG2 had consensus on addition of the Osage script, based on WG2 N4619 (L2/14-214). The version seen at WG2 incorporated the UTC’s recommendation (i.e., encode Osage as a separate script). Recommendation: Discuss and decide what to do. If the UTC decides on approval, the relevant information to record about the approval would be: Approve the Osage block (U+104B0..U+104FF), with 72 characters in the range U+104B0..U+104DB and U+104D8..U+104FB, with code points and glyphs as shown in WG2 N4619 (L2/14-214). H. Glagolitic Supplement The combining Glagolitic characters were agreed upon by WG2, but WG2 preferred a block name of “Glagolitic Supplement”. At the August 2014, the UTC had approved the characters and the block, but named the block “Glagolitic Extended-A”. Recommendation: Approve the change of the block name to Glagolitic Supplement. I. CJK Extension F WG2 agreed to the addition of “CJK Unified Ideographs Extension F”. See WG2 N4580 (summary form and its attached files). The current repertoire in the PDAM 2.2 ballot (as reflected in the pipeline) is: CJK Extension F block (U+2CEB0..U+2DDBF), with 3852 characters in the range U+2CEB0..U+2DDBB, with code points and glyphs as shown in WG2 N4580. Recommendation: The UTC should hold off on final approval of CJK Extension F, pending further review. In the meantime, there should be a ballot comment to make sure that the repertoire is updated to reflect the last minute changes recommended by the IRG. Comment: Dr Lu mentioned that at the last minute the SAT project removed 50 characters from Extension F. One of those characters also has a G-Source, so it is retained in the Extension F repertoire. The net is that the IRG is recommending the removal of 49 characters from the repertoire for CJK Extension F currently under ballot, together with closing up the resulting holes. J. CJK Unified Ideographs WG2 noted the following characters, which were all approved by the IRG, were added to the PDAM 2.1 ballot. These are now also in the PDAM 2.2 ballot. 3 CJK Unified Ideographs from U+9FCD..U+9FCF, which were requested by China (see WG2 N4582= L2/14-197) 1 CJK Unified Ideograph at U+9FD0, which resulted from the disunification of U+4CA4 (see WG2 N4582= L2/14-197) 5 urgently needed CJK Unified Ideographs from U+9FD1..U+9FD5, which came from the Unicode Consortium (see WG2 N4584) 20 CJK Unified Ideographs from U+9FD6..U+9FE9, which were requested by SEI for Slavonic transliteration (see WG2 N4583 Table 1) Recommendation: Approve the addition of the 29 CJK Unified Ideographs U+9FCD..U+9FE9. Comment: There is still some NB opposition to the Slavonic transliteration characters. K. Emoji Modifiers WG2 discussed at length different proposals for emoji modifiers. There was no consensus on any one proposal, but there was a desire to see some characters added in PDAM 2.2 in order to elicit broader national body comments. Five are included in PDAM 2.2 (see WG2 N4599 = L2/14-213): 1F3FB EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-1-2 1F3FC EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-3 1F3FD EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-4 1F3FE EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-5 1F3FF EMOJI MODIFIER FITZPATRICK TYPE-6 These are at the same code points as approved by the UTC, but with different character names. There was also a general desire among WG2 experts for UTC to elicit more input before taking any final action. SC2 passed a resolution to this effect. (See the UTC Liaison report.) Recommendations: Approve name changes for the five emoji modifiers. L CJK Glyph Changes WG2 agreed to 6 glyph changes, based on WG2 N4621: 3 in Extension A (U+3D1D, U+4CA4, U+7921), 1 in Extension B (U+2A3ED), and 2 in Extension C (U+2AD12, U+2B08F). Recommendation: Approve the glyph changes and some related source references, as noted below. Note: For U+4CA4, the H-source reference and glyph and were removed, and became the new U+9FD0, noted above under J. For U+3D1D, the H-source reference was moved to U+2A3ED. WG2 also agreed to replace the T-source reference for CJK Compatibility character U+2F949 with a new UCI source, and to change the radical value/stroke count for the URO code point U+9FCF.