Re: Public review of draft repertoire for ISO/IEC 10646

I'm not sure if it merits formal feedback, but would it be a good idea to
cross reference IDEOGRAPHIC TALLY MARK FIVE to CJK UNIFIED IDEOGRAPH-6B63?
They are effectively visually identical (in fact I was under the impression
they were the same thing).

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Rick McGowan <rick_at_unicode.org> wrote:

> The UTC would appreciate feedback on new repertoire that is currently
> under ballot for future additions to ISO/IEC 10646. This includes
> repertoire that has already been reviewed and approved by the UTC, but
> which will not be published until next year, as part of Version 10.0 of the
> Unicode Standard.
>
> This is your opportunity to review the planned new repertoire for possible
> problems, and to make any suggestions you might have about improvements for
> glyphs or character names.
>
> See PRI #327 <http://www.unicode.org/review/pri327/> and PRI #328
> <http://www.unicode.org/review/pri328/> for details on access to the
> draft repertoire documents for review, and for how to provide your
> feedback. The characters of interest -- the new repertoire under ballot --
> are highlighted in yellow in the code charts in those documents. Glyph
> corrections or improvements in the charts are highlighted in a light blue.
>
> Note that we already know about the mistaken glyph for the new character
> U+1D378 TALLY MARK FIVE, so you do not need to report that problem again!
> Note also that a few of the characters for review in PRI #328, including
> the 72 new emoji characters, have been accelerated for publication in
> Unicode 9.0. The UTC will not be able to respond to further feedback on
> those 9.0 characters, which are already frozen for publication.
>
>
Received on Thu Jun 16 2016 - 02:10:30 CDT