FR-010-133 [Bibliography] Unify references to Unicode

[wg21bot]

Bibliography [ostream.formatted.print] p4 iostream.format#print.fun-9

The C++ standard references no less than 4 different Unicode versions (12, 13, 14, 15).

Please refer to Unicode 15 and associated UAX documents consistently in the Bibliography section and impacted sections.

[tahonermann]

SG16 reviewed this issue along with FR-021-013 during its 2022-11-02 telecon. The following polls were taken:

• Poll 3: [FR-010-133][FR-021-013]: SG16 requests that the project editor discuss with the ISO the option of eschewing references to ISO/IEC 10646 in favor of the Unicode Standard both for technical consistency and release frequency.
  • Attendees: 9 (1 abstention)

  • Objection to unanimous consent.	SF	F	N	A	SA
    3	3	0	1	1

  • Weak consensus
  • SA: Use of the ISO/IEC 10646 document benefits from ISO governance.
  • SA: Would prefer to explore expansion of ISO/IEC 10646 to include more components of Unicode.
• Poll 4: [FR-010-133][FR-021-013]: SG16 recommends resolving these comments by restricting all references to the Unicode Standard to the version that corresponds to the referenced version of ISO/IEC 10646.

  • Attendees: 9 (1 abstention)	SF	F	N	A	SA
    2	3	0	3	0

  • No consensus.
  • A: It doesn't benefit the community to reference a Unicode version that is outdated by the time the standard is published.

What SG16 would ideally want is to reference only the Unicode Standard (and not ISO/IEC 10646) and for the Unicode Standard to be more rigorously specified. Since the ISO prefers that ISO standards reference other ISO standards when available it isn't clear that the first desire can be accommodated. Obviously, the second desire cannot be accommodated in a short amount of time.

The first poll is intended to explore whether the ISO would permit replacing the existing ISO/IEC 10646 references with references to the Unicode Standard. If permitted, this would resolve the comment since all referenced Unicode features would come from a single source.

The second poll was intended to probe SG16's appetite for resolving the NB comment by ensuring that all Unicode features are directly or indirectly referenced from the same Unicode Standard; the version that is aligned with the referenced ISO/IEC 10646 version. Opposition was raised to this approach because ISO/IEC 10646 releases happen less frequently than Unicode Standard releases; this approach would prevent the use of features from newer Unicode Standard releases for up to several years.

I'll reach out to the project editor to start the discussion about whether we can proceed with referencing just the Unicode Standard. If the ISO rejects that option, then I'll bring the topic back to SG16.

I'm going to retain the SG16 label for now.

[tahonermann]

P2736R0 seeks to address this issue (as well as FR-021-013).

[tahonermann]

SG16 discussed a draft of P2736R0 during its 2022-12-14 telecon. No polls were taken, discussion will continue at the next SG16 telecon scheduled for 2023-01-11. I'm retaining the SG16 label for now.

[tahonermann]

SG16 completed its review of a draft of P2736R1 during its 2023-01-25 telecon. The following poll was taken:

• Poll 1.2: Forward P2736R1, amended as discussed, to CWG and LWG as the recommended resolution of NB comments FR-010-133 and FR-021-013.

  • Attendees: 10 (2 abstentions)	SF	F	N	A	SA
    7	2	0	0	0

  • Unanimous consent.

I'm removing the SG16 label; this NB comment is ready for CWG and LWG review.

[jensmaurer]

Accepted with modifications.