Apparent discrepanccy between FAQ and Age.txt
sdaoden at yandex.com
Tue Jun 10 12:05:38 CDT 2014
Karl Williamson <public at khwilliamson.com> wrote:
|The FAQ http://www.unicode.org/faq/private_use.html#sentinels
|says that the last 2 code points on the planes except BMP were made
|noncharacters in TUS 3.1. DerivedAge.txt gives 2.0 for these.
The (nothing but informational except for @missing lines) comments
in DerivedAge.txt state very clearly:
# - The supplementary private use code points and the non-character code points
# were assigned in version 2.0, but not specifically listed in the UCD
# until versions 3.0 and 3.1 respectively.
|"The conformance wording about U+FFFE and U+FFFF changed somewhat in
|Unicode 2.0, but these were still the only two code points with this
|Unicode 3.1  was the watershed for the development of
|noncharacters in the standard. Unicode 3.1 was the first version to add
|supplementary characters to the standard. As a result, it also had to
|come to grips with the fact the ISO/IEC 10646-2:2001 had reserved the
|last two code points for every plane as "not a character"
Less scattering of information would be a pretty cool thing
nonetheless. I.e., i think it would be less academical but much
nicer if no FAQ would be necessary at all because the standard as
such covers background information, too.
I remember that one of the reasons i stopped any effort to go with
(the about 120 German Mark book of) Unicode 3.0 was that i was
incapable to wrap my head around a combining arabic example
somewhere; you need access to technical reports to get it done.
More information about the Unicode