ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2 N2553
DATE: 2003-08-26

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2
Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS) - ISO/IEC 10646
Secretariat: ANSIDOC TYPE:

Meeting Minutes

TITLE:

Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 43; Room 67, Kikai-Shinko-Kaikan Bldg.
3-5-8, Shiba-koen, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0011, Japan; 2002-12-9/12

SOURCE:

V.S. Umamaheswaran, Recording Secretary, and Mike Ksar, Convener

PROJECT:

JTC 1.02.18 – ISO/IEC 10646

STATUS:SC 2/WG 2 participants are requested to review the attached unconfirmed minutes,
act on appropriate noted action items, and to send any comments or corrections tothe convener as soon as possible but no later than 2003-09-30.

ACTION ID:

ACTDUE DATE:

2003-09-30

DISTRIBUTION:

SC 2/WG 2 members and Liaison organizations

MEDIUM:

Paper

NO. OF PAGES:

51 (including cover sheet)

Mike Ksar
Convener – ISO/IEC/JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2
Microsoft Corporation
1065 La Avenida Ave
Mountain View, CA, 94043
U. S. A.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

Phone: +1 650 693-1568

e-mail: mikeksar@microsoft.com

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 1 of 51
2003-08-26

ISO
International Organization for Standardization
Organisation Internationale de Normalisation
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2
Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS)
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2 N2553
Date: 2003-08-26
Title:

Source:Action:Distribution:

Unconfirmed minutes of Meeting 43
Room 67, Kikai-Shinko-Kaikan Bldg. 3-5-8, Shiba-koen, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0011,
Japan; 2002-12-9/12
V.S. Umamaheswaran (umavs@ca.ibm.com), Recording Secretary
Mike Ksar (mikeksar@microsoft.com), Convener
WG 2 members and Liaison organizations
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2 members and liaison organizations

1 Opening
Input document:
2548
Final Call for Meeting 43 and Updated Agenda; Mike Ksar; 2002-12-04

The convener Mr. Mike Ksar opened the meeting at 10:10h. Information Processing Society andInformation Technology Standards Commission of Japan (IPSJ/ITSCJ) hosted the meeting on behalf ofthe national body of Japan, Japanese Industrial Standards Committee (JISC). Mr. Masahiro SEKIGUCHI
welcomed the delegates to Japan on behalf of the host and explained the logistics and meetingarrangements. The meeting room had a Personal Computer, a printer and Internet access via wired andwireless LAN connections for use by the delegates. The logistics information was printed and distributed
to the delegates. A list of restaurants nearby was included. The ITSCJ office was located on 3rd floor. A
social event was planned for Wednesday evening, and the delegates were requested to registerthemselves for attending the event.

1.1

Roll Call

Input document:
N2501
Updated WG2 Experts List; Ksar; 2002-12

The following thirty three (33) delegates representing nine (9) national bodies, one (1) liaison organization, the SC2
secretariat and two (2) guests attended the meeting.
Name
V. S. (Uma)Umamaheswaran
Ben Ba Galtso
Chen Shuangxin
Chen Zhuang
Lobsang Tokme
Ngodrup
Wang Tiekun

Representing
Canada;Recording Secretary
China
China
China
China
China
China

Zhang Zhoucai
Ham Myong HO
Ri Kwang HO
Klaas RuppelElżbieta Broma-Wrzesień
Vladas Tumasonis
Maryam Fasihi
Roozbeh Pournader

China; IRG Rapporteur
DPR of Korea
DPR of Korea
Finland
Guest
Guest
Iran
Iran

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

Affiliation
IBM Canada Ltd.
Tibet University
Institute of Language Application, Ministry of Education
Chinese Electronics Standardization InstituteCommittee Office of Tibetan Languages
Tibet University
Department of Language Information Administration, Ministry of
Education
CCID
Pyongyang Informatics Centre
Committee for Standardization
Research Institute for the Languages of Finland
Telekomunikacja Polska, Poland
Vilnius University, Lithuania
Institute of Standards and Industrial Research of Iran
Sharif University of Technology

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 2 of 51
2003-08-26

Name
Michael Everson
Eiji MATSUOKA
Kôiti YAMAZAKI
Masahiro SEKIGUCHI
Shoichi SENDA
Takayuki K. SATO
Tatsuo L. KOBAYASHI
Yasuhiro ANAN
Chun Haeng CHO
Kyongsok KIM
Kohji SHIBANO
Toshiko KIMURAJames Seng
Cathy Wissink
Ken Whistler
Mike Ksar
Asmus Freytag

Michel Suignard

Representing
Ireland;Contributing Editor
Japan
Japan
Japan
Japan
Japan
Japan
Japan
Republic of Korea
Republic of Korea
SC2 Chair
SC2 Secretariat
Singapore
USA
USA;
Contributing Editor
USA; Convener
USA; Liaison - The
Unicode Consortium;
Contributing Editor
USA;
Project Editor

Affiliation
Everson Typography
Tokyo Gakugei University
CTICO Ltd.
Fujitsu Ltd.
NTT Information Sharing Platform LabsCenter of the International Cooperation for Computerization
Justsystem Corporation
Microsoft Corporation
Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy
Pusan National University
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
Information Technology Standards Commission of JapanRed Aura Pte. Ltd.
Microsoft Corporation
Sybase Inc.
Microsoft Corporation
Unicode Inc.

Microsoft Corporation

The experts list with address, phone numbers and other information, was distributed for delegates toreview and mark any changes needed. Delegates were requested to give their business cards also to thesecretary.
Drafting committee: The draft resolutions were prepared by the recording secretary Dr. V.S.
Umamaheswaran with assistance from Messrs. Michel Suignard (project editor), Takayuki Sato, Kenneth
Whistler (contributing editor), Asmus Freytag (contributing editor) and Mike Ksar (the convener).

2 Approval of the agenda
Input document:
2548
Final Call for Meeting 43 and Updated Agenda; Mike Ksar; 2002-12-04

Mr. Mike Ksar reviewed the preliminary agenda in document N2548. All documents that were received
by the convener up to December 6, 2002, have been entered on the agenda. A hardcopy of the latest
agenda was distributed containing items up to document N2562.
The focus of the meeting will be to complete item 7 - progressing 10646-1, item 8 - 10646-2 and item 9.1- merged document. All entries under item 6 are for information to delegates. Some of the changes tothe agenda are:Item 7.1 - add documents N2540, N2566 and N2567
Item 7.2 - document N2507 was withdrawn by Taiwan
Items 7.8 and 8.2 - change titles to "... Hanja character references ..."
Added new Item 8.9 – document N2563 from the editor on CJK Compatibility Source reference
errorsAdded new Item 11.8 - document N2448, Error correction.
The draft agenda in document N2548 was approved with some modifications, and additions of new
documents to the different agenda items. All changes made during the progress of the meeting are
captured and are reflected in the appropriate sections in these minutes. Some of the agenda items havebeen reorganized or renumbered in these minutes.
Section Number
Title
Page
1
Opening................................................................................................................................................................. 2
1.1 Roll Call........................................................................................................................................................... 22
Approval of the agenda ......................................................................................................................................... 3
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 3 of 51
2003-08-26

Section Number
Title
Page
3
Approval of minutes of meeting 42 ........................................................................................................................ 5
4
Review action items from previous meeting .......................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Action items from previous WG 2 meetings (numbers 25 to 38) ..................................................................... 6
4.2 Outstanding action items from meeting 39, 2000-10-08/11, Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece ............................ 6
4.3 Outstanding action items from meeting 40, 2001-04-02/05, Mountain View, CA, USA ................................... 6
4.4 Outstanding action items from meeting 41, 2001-10-15/18, Singapore........................................................... 6
4.5 New action items from meeting 42, 2002-05-20/23, Dublin, Ireland................................................................ 75
JTC1 and ITTF matters........................................................................................................................................ 13
5.1 Resolutions from JTC1 2002 Plenary............................................................................................................ 13
6
SC2 matters......................................................................................................................................................... 13
6.1 Announcement of publication of 10646-1 Amendment 1............................................................................... 13
6.2 Program of Work ........................................................................................................................................... 13
6.3 Subdivision of work to merge 10646 parts 1 & 2 ........................................................................................... 13
6.4 Submittals to ITTF ......................................................................................................................................... 13
6.5 Ballot results.................................................................................................................................................. 13
6.6 WG2 Report to SC2 ...................................................................................................................................... 14
6.7 ETSI telephone keypad proposal .................................................................................................................. 14710646-1: 2000 ..................................................................................................................................................... 14
7.1 Disposition of Comments on ballot results on FPDAM 2 ............................................................................... 14
7.2 Latinized Taiwanese...................................................................................................................................... 22
7.3 Vertical Line Extension character .................................................................................................................. 22
7.4 Shaping behavior of Syriac character for Sogdian & Persian........................................................................ 23
7.5 Greek Capital Lunate Sigma Symbol ............................................................................................................ 23
7.6 Six new HKSCS characters from HKSAR ..................................................................................................... 23
7.7 Latin letter - ue .............................................................................................................................................. 24
7.8 Addition of 3 Hanja character references to part 1 ........................................................................................ 24
7.9 Addition of one Oriya letter............................................................................................................................ 25
7.10
Afghani sign.............................................................................................................................................. 25
7.11
Greek Letter San ...................................................................................................................................... 25
7.12
Devanagari Glottal Stop ........................................................................................................................... 26
7.13
Greek Metrical Symbols ........................................................................................................................... 26
7.14
Glagolitic script – revised proposal ........................................................................................................... 27
7.15
Ol Chiki - revised proposal and feedback ................................................................................................. 27
7.16
Tibetan BrdaRten characters.................................................................................................................... 28
7.17
Additional Cyrillic characters for Siberian Yupik ....................................................................................... 29810646-2 ............................................................................................................................................................... 30
8.1 Disposition of Comments on ballot results FPDAM 1 .................................................................................... 30
8.2 Addition of 2 Hanja character references to 10646-2 .................................................................................... 30
8.3 Kharoshthi script............................................................................................................................................ 30
8.4 Manichaean script ......................................................................................................................................... 31
8.5 Old Persian script – revised proposal............................................................................................................ 31
8.6 Ancient Greek Musical Symbols.................................................................................................................... 32
8.7 Saurashtra script ........................................................................................................................................... 32
8.8 Avestan and Pahlavi script – revised proposal.............................................................................................. 32
8.9 Errors in CJK Compatibility characters’ source reference maps.................................................................... 33
9Architecture issues .............................................................................................................................................. 34
9.1 Merged 10646 parts 1 & 2............................................................................................................................. 34
9.2 Roadmap documents .................................................................................................................................... 36
9.3 Note on Soft Hyphen ..................................................................................................................................... 37
9.4 Constraints on character names for loose matching ..................................................................................... 38
9.5 CJK Compatibility characters – clarification request...................................................................................... 39
10
Publication issues.......................................................................................................................................... 39
11
IRG status and reports .................................................................................................................................. 39
11.1
IRG Resolutions) ...................................................................................................................................... 39
11.2
Request for clarifications – CJK Strokes .................................................................................................. 40
11.3
Create an Ideographic subset within 10646 ............................................................................................. 41
11.4
IRG Report to SC2 Plenary and to WG2 .................................................................................................. 42
11.5
Ideographic Unification ............................................................................................................................. 42
11.6
IRG Radical Classification ........................................................................................................................ 42
11.7
Report on first stroke/stroke count............................................................................................................ 42
11.8
Ancient Ideographs................................................................................................................................... 42
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 4 of 51
2003-08-26

Section Number
Title
Page
12
Defect reports................................................................................................................................................ 42
13
Liaison reports............................................................................................................................................... 42
13.1
Unicode Consortium ................................................................................................................................. 42
13.2
TC46......................................................................................................................................................... 43
13.3
IETF.......................................................................................................................................................... 43
13.4
TC304....................................................................................................................................................... 43
13.5
W3C ......................................................................................................................................................... 43
14
Other business .............................................................................................................................................. 43
14.1
Web Site Review ...................................................................................................................................... 43
14.2
Future Meetings ....................................................................................................................................... 43
15
Closing .......................................................................................................................................................... 43
15.1
Approval of Resolutions of Meeting 43..................................................................................................... 43
15.2
Adjournment ............................................................................................................................................. 44
16
Action Items .................................................................................................................................................. 44
16.1
Outstanding action items from meeting 41, 2001-10-15/18, Singapore.................................................... 44
16.2
Outstanding action items from meeting 42, 2002-05-20/23, Dublin, Ireland ............................................. 45
16.3
New action items from meeting 43, 2003-12-09/12, Tokyo, Japan........................................................... 46

3 Approval of minutes of meeting 42
Input document
2453
Unapproved Meeting Minutes, Dublin Meeting 42 Minutes; V.S. Umamaheswaran and Mike Ksar

Dr. Umamaheswaran introduced the unconfirmed meeting 42 minutes in document N2453, highlightingsome of the significant editorial changes.
Following corrections are noted:
a. Page 18, Irish comment T.15-1 – correct “see section 0” to “see section 7.11”.
b. Page 19 – Irish comment T15.3 – copy action item on Ireland into new action items list as AI-428d, in section 16.4.
c. Page 22 – Correct “ Discussion set 3” to “ Discussion set 4”
d. Page 28, Section 7.8, Item z – delete duplicate “We do not expect to find any more”.
e. Section 7.9 –Correct spelling for “Nuqtatain” a few places it is misspelled.
f. Section 7.9 – discussion: Merge items a and b together; Merge items g and h; renumber thewhole set.
g. Last bullet in section 7.15 (above 7.16 on page 32) – change to “ … reduced from 103 (?143) ..”.
h. Item x, section 7.18, (above 719 on page 34) Reword second sentence to “We do not expect
every variant of Han to be encoded …. “.
i. Section 8.4, Correct spelling of “Osmanya” wherever it is misspelled.
j. Section 8.6, Page 36, discussion item a, change “FPDAM-2 to Part 1” to “FPDAM-1 to Part 2”.
k. Section 10.4, discussion item a: -- change “V4” to “Unicode V4.0”.
l. Section 11, discussion item h, page 44, third line: change “will relay on WG2” to “will rely on
WG2”.
m. Section 16.4, AI 42-6b, page 55, in section 16.4, fix sequence numbering of items in resolution
M42.20, back to a, b and c (was printed as g. h and I in the minutes, and something else in thecollection of action items document distributed separately).
n. Corrected several instances of extra spaces, and some punctuation errors.

4 Review action items from previous meeting
Input document
2453
Unapproved Meeting Minutes, Dublin Meeting 42 Minutes; V.S. Umamaheswaran and Mike Ksar

Dr. Umamaheswaran reviewed the outstanding action items in section 16 of document N2453. The
updated status for each item is shown in the tables in the following sections. All action items that were
not completed are carried forward to the next meeting and are included under item 16 on page on page
44 in these minutes.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 5 of 51
2003-08-26

4.1

Action items from previous WG 2 meetings (numbers 25 to 38)

All action items recorded in the minutes of the following meetings have been either completed or dropped. Only new
action items from the last meeting and outstanding action items from earlier meetings are listed in the tables that
follow.
a. meeting 25, 1994-04-18/22, Antalya, Turkey (document N1033)
b. meeting 26, 1994-10-10/14,San Francisco, CA, USA (document N1117)
c. meeting 27, 1995-04-03/07, Geneva, Switzerland (document N1203)
d. meeting 28, 1995-06-22/26, Helsinki, Finland (document N 1253)
e. meeting 29, 1995-11-06/10, Tokyo, Japan (document N1303)
f. meeting 30, 1996-04-22/26, Copenhagen, Denmark (document N1353)
g. meeting 31, 1996-08-12/16, Québec City, Canada (document N1453)
h. meeting 32, 1997-01-20/24, Singapore (document N1503)
i. meeting 33, 1997-06-30/07-04, Heraklion, Crete, Greece (document N1603)
j. meeting 34, 1998-03-16/20, Redmond, WA, USA (document N1703)
k. meeting 35, 1998-09-21/25, London, UK (document N1903)
l. meeting 36, 1999-03-09/15, Fukuoka, Japan (document N2003)
m. meeting 37, 1999-09-17/21, Copenhagen, Denmark (document N2103) andn. meeting 38, 2000-07-18/21, Beijing, China (document N2203).

4.2

Outstanding action items from meeting 39, 2000-10-08/11, Vouliagmeni,
Athens, Greece
Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2254, andminutes in document N2253, with the corrections to the minutes noted in
section 3 of document N2353, for Meeting 39)
AI-39-6 Irish national body (Mr. Michael Everson)c Is invited to prepare a contribution on guidelines on the use of DIGITS versus
NAMES of DIGITS in character names in ISO/IEC 10646.
M40, M41 and M42 - in progress.

4.3

Dropped.

Outstanding action items from meeting 40, 2001-04-02/05, Mountain View,
CA, USA

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2354, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2353 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2403, for Meeting 40)
AI-40-9 The US national body (Mr. Edwin Hart))c US (Mr. Edwin Hart) and Japan (Mr. Takayuki Sato) are invited to prepare theworking document for revising the TR15285 based on the ad hoc report in
document N2359.
M41 and M42 - In progress.
AI-40-11 Japanese national body (Mr. Takayuki Sato)c US (Mr. Edwin Hart) and Japan (Mr. Takayuki Sato) are invited to prepare theworking document for revising the TR15285 based on the ad hoc report in
document N2359.
M41 and M42 - In progress.
AI-40-12 Swedish national body (Dr. Kent Karlsson)a Is invited to submit a contribution on the question of “whether IDS are graphic
characters?” and related concerns raised during the discussion on dispositionof comment SE2 from Sweden on PDAM-1.
M41 and M42 - In progress.

4.4

StatusStatusDropped. Mr. Edwin
Hart has retired.

Dropped.

Dropped.

Outstanding action items from meeting 41, 2001-10-15/18, Singapore
Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2404R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2403 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2453, for Meeting 41)
AI-41-5 Ad hoc group on principles and procedures (lead - Dr. V.S.
UMAmaheswaran)a To check for any suitable enhancement needed regarding resolution M41.13(Policy regarding fonts for submissions to 10646).
M42 and M43 - In progress.
c To address how to reference ISO/IEC 10646 in other publications and include

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusIn progress.

In progress.
Page 6 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2404R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2403 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2453, for Meeting 41)
in principles and procedures document.
M42 and M43 - In progress.
d To look at the Principles and Procedures document and see if the guidelines
have to be enhanced re: glyph related guidelines / defect reports etc. basedon document N2382 (along with Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi, Japan).
M42 and M43 - In progress.
AI-41-6 IRG Rapporteur (Mr. Zhang Zhoucai)c To examine the guidelines document N2382 (from Japan - Mr. Tatsuo
Kobayashi) and provide feedback to WG 2.
M42 and M43 - In progress.
AI-41-9 Chinese national body (Mr. Zhang Zhoucai)a Is invited to confirm with the Chinese Dai experts, working with thecontributing editor Dr. Asmus Freytag, on the acceptability of Irish proposal for
the Dai scripts in document N2372.
M42 - In progress.
AI-41-12 Japanese national body (Mr. Takayuki Sato, Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi)a Is invited to look at the Principles and Procedures document and see if theguidelines have to be enhanced re: glyph related guidelines / defect reports
etc. based on document N2382 (along with Dr. Umamaheswaran).
M42 and M43 - In progress.

4.5

StatusIn progress.

In progress.

Completed.

In progress.

New action items from meeting 42, 2002-05-20/23, Dublin, Ireland
Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2553 for Meeting 42)
AI-42-1 Meeting Secretary - Dr. V.S. UMAmaheswaran
a To finalize the document N2454 containing the adopted meeting resolutions
and send it to the convener as soon as possible.
b To finalize the document N2453 containing the unconfirmed meeting minutes
and send it to the convener as soon as possible.
AI-42-2 Convener - Mr. Mike Ksar
a To place document N2448 - Error Corrections from the IRG on the next
meeting's agenda, to address any national body feedback.
AI-42-3 Editor of ISO/IEC 10646-1 Mr. Michel Suignard with assistance fromcontributing editors
To prepare the appropriate AM, DAM or PDAM texts, sub-division proposals,collection of editorial text for the next edition, corrigendum text, or entries incollections of characters for future coding, with assistance from other identified
parties, in accordance with the following:
a-1 M42.1 (Eject symbol): WG2 resolves to encode in the BMP, 23CF EJECTSYMBOL based on details in document N2432, with a filled-in version of theglyph from figures 2 and 4 in document N2415, and instructs its project editor
to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
a-2 M42.2 (Additional Indic characters): WG2 resolves to encode the twelve
additional Indic characters in the BMP, with their glyphs, code positions andnames as detailed in document N2425, and instructs its project editor to
include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
a-3 M42.3 (Syriac characters): WG2 resolves to encode the six additional Syriac
characters the BMP for use in Sogdian and Persian languages proposed in
document N2422 as follows:
072D SYRIAC LETTER PERSIAN BHETH
072E SYRIAC LETTER PERSIAN GHAMAL
072F SYRIAC LETTER PERSIAN DHALATH
074D SYRIAC LETTER SOGDIAN ZHAIN
074E SYRIAC LETTER SOGDIAN KHAPH
074F SYRIAC LETTER SOGDIAN FE
with their glyphs as shown on page 5 of document N2422, and instructs its
project editor to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusCompleted; see
document N2454R.
Completed; see
document N2453.
Completed. Agenda
item M43-11.8 added.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.
Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.
Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Page 7 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2553 for Meeting 42)
a-4 M42.4 (Tamil symbols feedback): WG2 accepts the change to annotation for
the Tamil Number Sign at 0BFA from Akkam to Enn, proposed in document
N2421, and instructs its project editor to include this change in FPDAM-2 to
ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
a-5 M42.5 (Uralic Phonetic Alphabet Extensions): WG2 resolves to encode the134 phonetic extension characters in the BMP for use in UPA, with code
positions, names and glyphs as shown in document N2442, including theentry 0357 COMBINING RIGHT HALF RING ABOVE (missing from thenames list), and creating a new block 1D00-1D7F Phonetic Extensions, andinstructs its project editor to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1:
2000.
a-6 M42.6 (Urdu characters): WG2 resolves to encode the following charactersin the BMP for use in Urdu, proposed in document N2413-4 with their glyphs
from that document:
060F ARABIC SIGN MISRA
0603 ARABIC SIGN SAFHA
0659 ARABIC SMALL HIGH TAH (also to be added to the list of
combining marks in Annex B)
FDFD ARABIC LIGATURE BISMILLAH ARRAHMAN ARRAHIM
and instructs its project editor to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 106461: 2000.
a-7 M42.7 (Khmer characters): Based on the recommendations from the ad hocgroup on Khmer script at meeting 42, WG2 resolves to:
Add explanatory notes in Annex P on the use of characters at code
positions 17A3, 17A4, 17B4, 17B5, 17D3 and 17D8.
Change the glyphs to 17B4 and 17B5 to reflect their intended usage
in the script
Refinements to a few other glyphs as agreed upon by the ad hocgroup on Khmer, as reflected in the code charts in document N2491(Table 53, Row 17)
and instructs its project editor to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 106461: 2000.
a-8 M42.8 (Double diacritics): WG2 accepts the three double diacritics proposedin document N2457 for encoding in the BMP as follows:
035D COMBINING DOUBLE BREVE
035E COMBINING DOUBLE MACRON
035F COMBINING DOUBLE MACRON BELOW (changed fromproposal in document N2457)
with glyphs shown on page 3 of document N2457, and instructs its project
editor to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
a-9 M42.9 (Clarification notes on UCS4 with UTF-32 and on the term
"Canonical"): WG2 accepts the notes proposed in document N2497 as
clarification text in clause 5 for the term "canonical", and in clause 13.2 for
UCS-4, and instructs its project editor to include these in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC
10646-1: 2000.
M42.10 (Gujarati Sign Avagraha):
WG2 accepts the defect and proposed correction to the glyph for 0ABDGUJARATI SIGN AVAGRAHA, (reported in document N2417) and instructs its
project editor to include this editorial correction in FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC
10646-1: 2000.
a-10 M42.11 (Removal of 2 Variation Sequences): WG2 accepts the reported
defect and the rationale provided in document N2456, and resolves to remove
the two variation sequences 2278 + FE00 and 2279 + FE00 from the list of
sequences under clause 24.5 - Variation Selectors (in Amd. 1 to ISO/IEC
10646-1: 2000). WG2 instructs its project editor to include this correction in
FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1.
a-11 M42.12 (ROK CJK Source reference):
WG2 instructs the IRG to provide new CJK source data file by:a. updating ROK sources, replacing K-xxxx(sp) to K4-xxxx (no space), to the
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusCompleted; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.
Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.
Page 8 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2553 for Meeting 42)
project editor by 2002-06-15, andb. fixing the error in the CJK Source Reference table for 26C29 -- J4-2544

Status(see disposition of ballot comments in document N2490)
a-12

a-13

a-14

b

IRG is also instructed to update the Super CJK database accordingly.
M42.13 (Compatibility Hanja characters):
WG2 resolves to add 122 compatibility Hanja characters to the range FA70 to
FAE9 and mapping of 38 compatibility Hanja characters to existing ideographs(see details in document N2493), to address the PDAM-2 ballot commentsfrom DPRK.
M42.14 (FPDAM-2 to Part 1):
WG 2 accepts the disposition of PDAM-2 ballot comments in document
N2489 including the following significant changes:
a. Modifications to Limbu script entries in Annex B and the corresponding
charts in Table 54, Row 19, as identified in document N2489 (based onchanges proposed in document N2410)
b. Addition of 16 Arabic characters as identified in document N2489 (basedon details provided in documents N2481-2483 and N2487, includingchanges to the names of four characters identified in document N2489),
and the addition of combining marks from this list to Appendix B
c. Removal of 06DD END OF AYAH from the list of combining characters in
Annex Bd. Addition of 24FF NEGATIVE CIRCLED DIGIT ZERO (based on details in
document N2441)
e. Addition of 43 Khmer characters in code positions 17DD, 17F0--17F9,
19E0--19FF (based on details in documents N2470 and N2471), andcreating the new block 19E0--19FF called KHMER SYMBOLS.
f. Removal of 267E DO NOT LITTER SIGN , 267F RECYCLABLE
PACKAGING, 31D0--31D4 (five Vulgar Fraction characters), 2618
CIRCLED UPWARDS INDICATION, 2700 LEFTWARDS SCISSORS.
g. Changing names to 2614 UMBRELLA WITH RAIN DROPS and 2615
HOT BEVERAGE
h. Moving and renaming of 23CF to 26A0 WARNING SIGN, and 23D0 to
26A1 HIGH VOLTAGE SIGN
i. Renaming block name Supplemental Arrows-C to Miscellaneous Symbols
and Arrows
j. Removal of Supplemental CJK compatibility block by moving 31C0 to
32CC SQUARE HG, 31C1 to 32CD SQUARE ERG, 31C2 to 32CE
SQUARE EV, 31C3 to 32CF LIMILTED LIABILITY SIGN, 31C4 to 3250
PARTNERSHIP SIGN and 31C5 to 213B FACSIMILE SIGN.
k. Addition of a new collection MODERN EUROPEAN SCRIPTS
l. Addition of two Greek letters for Bactrian 03F7 GREEK CAPITALLETTER BACTRIAN SHO and 03F8 GREEK SMALL LETTER
BACTRIAN SHO (based on details in document N2411).
M42.15 ( Progression of Amendment 2 to 10646-1
WG2 instructs its project editor to prepare the text for FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC
10646-1 based on the disposition of comments in document N2489, andincluding other accepted changes from resolutions M42.1 to M42.13 above,and submit these documents to the SC2 secretariat for FPDAM ballot with thefollowing modified schedule of FPDAM-2 2002-10; FDAM-2 2003-04.
M42.25 (Single part standard): WG2 accepts in principle the proposal in
document N2408 to combine the two parts of 10646 into a single part andrequests its project editor to prepare a new project sub-division proposal andsend to SC2 for approval with the rationale from document N2408 and thefollowing scope:Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
documents N 2489
and N SC2 N3624.

Completed; see
document N2499R
and SC2 N3638(N2506).

To merge and reorganize the textual parts of 10646-1: 2000, 106462: 2001, Amd. 1 to 10646-1: 2000 and the final texts of Amd. 2 to10646-1: 2000 and Amd. 1 to 10646-2: 2001 (after completion ofthese amendments)
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 9 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2553 for Meeting 42)

StatusTo merge and reorganize the code charts and name lists of the twoparts and the three amendments mentioned above, keeping themultiple-column layout for the CJKV Ideographs in the BMP
unmodified.

AI-42-4

a-1

a-2

a-3

a-4

WG2 further instructs its project editor to prepare a Working Draft of thesingle-part document for consideration at the next WG2 meeting following theabove-outlined scope.
The project schedule will be determined at the December 2002 meeting of
WG2 after a review of the working draft.
Editor of ISO/IEC 10646-2: Mr. Michel Suignard with assistance fromcontributing editors
To prepare the appropriate AM, DAM or PDAM texts, sub-division proposals,collection of editorial text for the next edition, corrigendum text, or entries incollections of characters for future coding, with assistance from other identified
parties, in accordance with the following:
M42.16 (Monogram, digram and tetragram characters): WG2 accepts the
87 monogram, digram and tetragram Tai Xuan Jing Symbols for encoding in
Plane 1 with the code positions, glyphs and character names as shown in
document N2416, in a block from 1D300 to 1D356 with the block name "TaiXuan Jing Symbols". WG2 further instructs its project editor to include thesecharacters in FPDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2.
M42.17 (Changes to Aegean script): WG2 accepts the following changes to
the Aegean script encoded inPDAM-1 to 10646-2 detailed in document
N2455:
a. Remove the annotations to character names for 1000E, 10018, 10001B,
10025, 1002D, 10042, 10049 and 10052
b. Change the glyphs for 10009, 10014, 1000E, 10099, 100D7 and 1013D
to those shown in document N2455.
WG2 further instructs its project editor to include these characters in FPDAM1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2.
M42.18 (Four Deseret characters): G2 accepts the request for adding four
Deseret characters in documents N2473 and N2474, and allocates them asfollows:
10426 DESERET CAPITAL LETTER OI with the third glyph on page
1 of document N2473
10427 DESERET CAPITAL LETTER EW with the first glyph on page
1 of document N2473
1044E DESERET SMALL LETTER OI with the fourth glyph on page
1 of document N2473
1044F DESERET SMALL LETTER EW with the second glyph on
page 1 of document N2473
WG2 further instructs its project editor to include these characters in FPDAM1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2.
M42.19 (Disunify Mathematical Script Small L): G2 accepts the request fordisunification of MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT SMALL L character from SCRIPTSMALL L at 2114 (in document N2449), and resolves to encode the disunified
character as follows:

Completed; see
documents N 2490
and SC2 N3625.

Completed; see
documents N 2490
and SC2 N3625

Completed; see
documents N 2490
and SC2 N3625

Completed; see
documents N 2490
and SC2 N3625

1D4C1 MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT SMALL L (with the glyph shown in
document N2449)
and instructs its project editor to include it in FPDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2.
a-5 M42.20 (CJK Error Corrections): WG2 resolves to correct the following as
Completed; seerecommended by IRG in document N2448:
documents N 2490
a. Change the G-source references for the following characters from G_KX and SC2 N3625
to G_HZ:
U+23B0E, U+23839, U+24BAD, U+26CED, U+26F5F, U+27466,
U+23F72, U+27B66
b. Drop the G-source references for the following characters:
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 10 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2553 for Meeting 42)
U+24B3E, U+24C67, U+29B3B, U+2579B, U+266A9, U+24454,
U+239F7
c. Correct the glyphs for the following eight Unified Ideographs to thoseshown in document N2448: U+21E45, U+236AD, U+2384F, U+24FC4,
U+25D0E, U+276EB, U+27CF1, and,U+2890F.

a-6

a-7

AI-42-5abcAI-42-6aband instructs its project editor to include these corrections in FPDAM-1 to
ISO/IEC 10646-2.
The IRG is instructed to update the Super_CJK database accordingly.
M42.21 (Amendment 1 to 10646-2): WG 2 accepts the disposition of PDAM1 ballot comments in document N2490, which includes the following notablechanges from the PDAM-1 text:
a. The block E0110-E01FF is moved left by 1 column to E0100 to E01EF
and renamed VARIATION SELECTORS SUPPLEMENT, for the variation
selectors in the SPP.
b. Addition of mapping of code position 2564A to DPRK source reference
KP1-6134 in the CJK Source Reference table for CJKB (also requested in
document N2427)
No DPRK compatibility ideographs in SIP (see resolution M42.13 above).
M42.22 (Progression of Amendment 1 to 10646-2): WG2 instructs its
project editor to prepare the text for FPDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2 based on
the disposition of comments in document N2490, and including other acceptedchanges from resolutions M42.16 to M42.20 above, and submit these
documents to the SC2 secretariat for FPDAM ballot with the following modified
schedule of FPDAM-1 2002-10; FDAM-1 2003-04.
Ad hoc group on principles and procedures (lead - Dr. V.S.
UMAmaheswaran)
to send document N2461 to the SC 2 secretariat per resolution M42.24(Roadmaps): WG2 accepts the snapshot of the latest roadmaps in document
N2461 and requests SC2 to circulate to national bodies and liaisonorganizations for referencing as a guide for future submissions replacing theprevious snapshot document N2409.
Include document N2423 - Proposal for "Error correction on unified
ideographs in UCS"; in discussion regarding CJK Error corrections andprepare appropriate new text to be added to Principles and Procedures
documents.
M43 – in progress.
Messrs. Umamaheswaran, Takayuki Sato, Tatsuo Kobayashi, and a Unicode
representative to consider the proposal in document N2467 - Proposal:"Additional guideline in the WG2 Principles and Procedures" and suggest
additions to the principles and procedures document.
M43 – in progress.
IRG Rapporteur (Mr. Zhang Zhoucai)
To act on resolution M42.26 (Basic international CJK sub-sets): WG2 notes
resolution M19.2 from IRG in document N2447, and instructs the IRG to form
an interest group, investigate and report to the next WG2 meeting on theneed, scope and criteria for one or more basic international subsets of CJK
Unified Ideographs.
To update the Super_CJK database per resolution M42.20 (CJK Error
Corrections): WG2 resolves to correct the following as recommended by IRG
in document N2448:
a. Change the G-source references for the following characters from G_KX
to G_HZ:
U+23B0E, U+23839, U+24BAD, U+26CED, U+26F5F, U+27466,
U+23F72, U+27B66
b. Drop the G-source references for the following characters:
U+24B3E, U+24C67, U+29B3B, U+2579B, U+266A9, U+24454,
U+239F7
c. Correct the glyphs for the following eight Unified Ideographs to those

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusCompleted; see
documents N 2490
and SC2 N3625

Completed; see
documents N 2490
and SC2 N3625

Completed.

In progress.

In progress.

Completed; see
document N2539(agenda M43-11.3)

Completed items aand b; Item c is inprogress (agenda
M43-8.1).

Page 11 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 with the corrections noted in
section 3 of document N2553 for Meeting 42)
shown in document N2448: U+21E45, U+236AD, U+2384F, U+24FC4,
U+25D0E, U+276EB, U+27CF1, and,U+2890F.

AI-42-7ab

AI-42-8aband instructs its project editor to include these corrections in FPDAM-1 to
ISO/IEC 10646-2.
The IRG is instructed to update the Super_CJK database accordingly.
M43 - Item c in the above resolution is in progress.
The US national body (Mr. Michel Suignard / Dr. Asmus Freytag)
To verify the accuracy of the glyph for Oriya Letter VA in document N2425 forinclusion in FPDAM-1 charts.
With reference to documents N2424 - Reconsidering request: “Font supply
guide for UCS development” (M41.13); Japan – Sato; 2002-03-25; N2443 Clarification to WG2 N3568R, M41.13 resolution in Singapore; Singapore;
2002-05-06; N2447 - IRG #19 Resolutions; IRG; 2002-05-09 (Resolution
M19.4), Dr. Asmus Freytag to prepare document N2445 on Font Policy
clarification, based on ad hoc discussions with the project editor and IRG
rapporteur and other interested parties.
M43 – in progress.
The Irish national body (Mr. Michael Everson)
To provide a table for Syriac shaping for the additional accepted charactersfrom document N2422.
To act on the resolution M42.3 (Coptic disunification):
WG2 accepts the rationale and agrees in principle to the disunification of
Coptic script from Greek script proposed in document N2444 and invites the
proposers to submit a refined proposal for Coptic for future consideration by
WG2.
M43 – in progress.

c To prepare a written report summarizing the ad hoc discussions

StatusCompleted; see
document N2525.
In progress.

Completed; see
document N2509.
In progress.

Completed; seeduring the Dublin meeting, on "Additional compatibility characters from document N2498.
TC46".
d Is invited to prepare a separate contribution regarding guidebook symbols,
resulting from discussion on Irish comment T.15-3 in document N2486.
M43 – in progress.
AI-42-9 Japanese national body (Mr. Takayuki Sato, Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi)a To take feedback to Nepal, based on the ad hoc discussion on Limbu

In progress.

Completed.

script at meeting 42 in Dublin (see discussion on disposition ofJapanese comments to PDAM-2 of Part 1).
AI-42-10 All national bodies and liaison organizations
a To review and feedback on the proposal to add IDEOGRAPHIC

Noted.

TABOO VARIATION INDICATOR in document N2475.
b To take note of M42.28 (Future Meetings): WG 2 meetings:
Meeting 43 – 2002-12-09/12 (to be co-located with SC 2 plenary on
2002-12-12/13) Japan
Meeting 44 -- 2003-10-20/23, San Francisco Bay area, USA
Meeting 45 -- 2004-10 (tentative), Europe (tentative)
IRG meetings:
IRG 20 - Hanoi, Vietnam 2002-11-18/22
IRG 21 - China 2003-04-07/11
IRG 22 - Taipei (tentative) - after WG2 meeting 44 (tentative).
c To review and feedback to the convener on improving the WG2 website.
d To review and feedback on the impact of requested changes tomapping tables in document N2448 - Error Corrections from the IRG.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Noted.

Noted.
Noted – no feed back.

Page 12 of 51
2003-08-26

5 JTC1 and ITTF matters
5.1

Resolutions from JTC1 2002 Plenary

Input document:
J1N6927/SC2N3643
Resolutions Adopted at the 17th Meeting of ISO/IEC JTC 1, 21-25 October 2002 in Sophia
Antipolis, France; 2002-11-04

Mr. Mike Ksar: The idea of a Technical Direction has been dropped from JTC1. CLAUI was one of the
TDs and has been dropped. This topic will be discussed in SC2. There will be a SC Chairs meeting in
Geneva, May/June 2003. At the last CLAUI meeting there were only three attendees – Mr. Alain LaBonté
representing SC35, Mr. Keld Simonsen representing SC22/WG20 and Mr. Yves-Neuville, Chair of SC35.
From SC2/ WG2 point of view, since all the information is available on line, email would be adequatemeans of coordination. Professor Kohji Shibano representing SC2 participated in the discussion at the
JTC1 meeting on CLAUI - WG2's input from Dublin was accepted in principle by JTC1. The JTC1
resolutions document is available on line.
SC29 and SC22 etc. are some of the current subcommittees with IPR issues. SC2 does not have any atthis time. ISO CS deals with IPR policies and issues for JTC1. SCs with IPR issues have to work withISO CS. JTC 1 directives contain the IPR policies. The next JTC1 meeting is Nov 2003 in Singapore.
JTC1 has a long term business plan and they are posted on JTC1 web site – www.jtc1.org or under ITTF
in www.iso.ch.
Dr. Ken Whistler: There was some question about WG3 publication about 8859-7. It is an SC2 matter.

6 SC2 matters
6.1

Announcement of publication of 10646-1 Amendment 1

Input document:
SC2 N3626 Notice of Publication: ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000/Amd. 1, Information technology -- Universal Multiple-Octet
Coded Character Set (UCS) -- Part 1: Architecture and Multilingual Plane - AMENDMENT 1: Mathematicalsymbols and other characters; SC2 Secretariat; 2002-07-16

ISO/IEC 10646-2000/Amd. 1 was published in July 2002. The editor / contributing editors would like to
get a copy of the final publication. The convener will investigate.

6.2

Program of Work

Input document:
URL: http://anubis.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/open/pow.htm

The list of projects and work items were presented on line. See the SC2 web site.

6.3

Subdivision of work to merge 10646 parts 1 & 2

Input document:
2506
Request for subdivision of work – merge 10646 parts 1 and 2 into single part as edition 3; Ksar; 2002-09-24

The document N2506 is the result from an action item on the convener. It will be discussed at the SC2
meeting and is expected to be approved. The possible number for the combined standard will be 10646:
2003 - it will not be called 3rd edition.

6.4

Submittals to ITTF

None at this time.

6.5

Ballot results

Input documents:
2520
Summary of Voting/Table of Replies – 10646-1 Amendment 2; SC2 Secretariat; 2002-11-15
2521
Summary of Voting/Table of Replies – 10646-2 Amendment 1; SC2 Secretariat; 2002-11-15

See discussions under agenda items 7.1 on page 14 and 8.1 on page 30.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 13 of 51
2003-08-26

6.6

WG2 Report to SC2

Input document:
2519
WG2 Report to SC2; Mike Ksar; 2002-11-19

Document N2519 contains the convener's report to SC2. It was for information to the delegates and was
not discussed.

6.7

ETSI telephone keypad proposal

Input document:
2511
ETSI keyboard proposal; ETSI; 2002-11-06

Document N2511 is being circulated in European Telecommunications Standards Institute who is working
on input of characters from ISO/IEC 10646 on a Telephone keypad. The contributions were made by Mr.
Karl-Ivar Larsson from Sweden. He had recommended use of ISO/IEC 10646 for encoding the output
from the keypads. The document was for information to the delegates and was not discussed.

7 10646-1: 2000
7.1

Disposition of Comments on ballot results on FPDAM 2

Input documents:
2520
Summary of Voting/Table of Replies – 10646-1 Amendment 2; SC2 Secretariat; 2002-11-15
2540
Corrections to Compatibility CJK Ideographs Table in FPDAM; Asmus Freytag; 2002-12-05
2541
Proposed disposition of comments - 10646-1 Amendment 2; Suignard; 2002-12-03
2566
Review of DPRK Compatibility Ideographs; Lee Collins/US and Asmus Freytag/Unicode; 2002-12-09
2567
Towards resolution on the name of U+FDFD - Basmalah; Michael Everson and Roozbeh Pournader; 2002-1209
2568
Consensus on the name of U+FDFD – basmalah; Michael Everson and Roozbeh Pournader; 2002-12-10
Output document:
2569R
Disposition of comments - 10646-1 Amendment 2; Suignard; 2002-12-122573
CJK Compat ad hoc report; Ad hoc – Anan; 2002-12-11
2572
CJK Compat 107 char; Freytag; 2002-12-11

Document N2520 contains the table of replies on the ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000 FPDAM-2 ballot. Of thetotal of 35 member bodies, 9 had approved (Canada had comments), 4 had disapproved (Iran, Ireland,
Republic of Korea and USA), 5 had abstained and 17 had not voted. The editor, Mr. Michel Suignard, led
the discussion on the proposed disposition of comments in document N2541. The following attempts tocapture all the important discussion during the meeting. The final disposition of comments prepared by
the editor is in document N2459R.
Canada: Approval with comments:a. Editorial - Accepted.
b. Technical - LTR should be RTL for collection 105. Accepted; US also has commented on thesame.
Iran: DisapprovalT1 p18, 19, Names and glyphs are interchanged.
Accepted: Interchange the glyphs for 060D and 060E; keep the names as they are. Request from
Iran was also to ensure that there are no more such errors in the editing process.
T2 Move character at 0659 to 0615 - since 0659 applies to only the word ending (last character).
Discussion:a. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The name of the character in 061x is different from 065x group.
b. Dr. Ken Whistler: The name for 0615 came from Pakistan and was grouped with other Koraniccharacters.
c. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader: There are other possible locations at the end of the unused blocks.
Disposition: Iran’s proposed change is accepted.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 14 of 51
2003-08-26

(Note: Spelling of SAFHA is Correct in Table 16 -- correct the minutes document. In the discussions
on Review of meeting minutes of M42, difference in spelling with SAFAH quoted from the contribution
from Pakistan was brought up. SAFHA as is spelled in the relevant resolution is correct.).
T.3 Request to move 0603 to 060B since it was not marked with a SQUARE DOTTED line around it.
After some discussion Iran withdrew the comment.
T.4 Proposal to change the name for FDFD – ARABIC LIGATURE BISMILLAH ARRAHMAN
ARRAHIM; the request is based on transliteration being different. Ireland also had voted negative on
the name of this character.
Discussion:
Mr. Michael Everson: in Ireland we said we would like to verify the name for this character. We havea different preferred name from Dr. Sarmad Hussain. Another expert, Mr. Tom Milo, has another
input that has another name for the whole ligature. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader and I have anotherproposed name for the abbreviation. Document N2567 is an input document to address the issue
and has been sent in an email to Dr. Sarmad Hussain. We will await his feedback.
An ad hoc discussion between Messrs. Roozbeh Pournader and Mr. Michael Everson with email
correspondence with Dr. Sarmad Hussein and Mr. Mohammed Afzal in Pakistan resulted in the new
proposed name in the consensus document N2568. ARABIC LIGATURE BISMILLAH AR-RAHMAN
AR-RAHEEM is the new name - the dashes in the two last words and EE replacing I in RAHEEM are the changes to what is in the current PDAM text. Both Iran and Ireland reversed their votes
based on the above.
Disposition: Accept the change to ARABIC LIGATURE BISMILLAH AR-RAHMAN AR-RAHEE as
the new name for FDFD.
Editorial comments:
Glyph changes are proposed for 0656, 0657, 0659, 06EE, 06EF, and 06FF, based on the styles
being different.
The new characters have temporary glyphs -- once we get the proper fonts, the glyphs will berevised. The Naskhi style is requested by Iran. Whether or not it is possible to get them in thenext amendment is questionable. Certainly we can get the update in the next edition. 0657 could
be confused with 064F and should be corrected. Dr. Sarmad Hussain had provided the glyph.
Accepted in principle -- contributing editors to fix the shapes.
Ireland - Disapproval
T.1 U+0658 remove the dash in the name add MARK; to read ARABIC MARK NOON GHUNNA(also US comment T.3). Accepted.
T.2 (Should be) Editorial -- also elsewhere. Accepted.
T.3 Name change for FDFD – see disposition to Iran comment T.4 above.
E.1 - 2615 - Glyph for Hot Beverage should be fixed.
Accept in principle. Editor is to resolve.
Republic of Korea - Disapproval
T.1 Transliterated names for 031C, 031D, 032C and 032D are not in accordance with TS 11941 on
naming Korean Hangul letters and syllables.
Discussion:a. Mr. Michel Suignard: This comment is a repeat of what was in the PDAM ballot. Looks like therequest is for some information on the transliteration rules to be documented in the standard.
b. Prof. Kyongsok Kim: We need to know the scheme or mapping table used by DPRK for thesenames. The request is not to change the names.
c. Dr. Asmus Freytag: We can take a decision that we will not add any more! That will be theeasiest decision.
Disposition: Noted.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 15 of 51
2003-08-26

Action Item: Professor Kyongsok Kim is invited to contribute information on transliteration rules to be
included in the standard for both T.2 Content of UAX 15 is not under WG2 control. There areproblems in UAX 15 regarding DPRK and for ROK.
Normalization for Hangul. So ROK cannot accept referencing to that standard.
Discussion:a. Dr. Ken Whistler: Changes to normalization will cause instability. One could conceivably havenamed tailored normalization for Korean etc. UTC is still discussing such a possibility.
b. Dr. Asmus Freytag: Normalization is being used by several protocols - perhaps because theycare for only a subset of the standard. Even if it can be improved the concept of normalization isimportant for ISO/IEC 10646. Removing the reference can cause bigger problems. If applying
normalization introduces specific problems with Korean text, we could essentially recognize thefact that the current UAX 15 is the best available, but not necessarily ideal for all scripts under all
circumstances. We could make a note to that effect.
c. Mr. Michel Suignard: A note could be added that the normalized text may not be the best fromsemantic correctness or linguistic correctness etc. The goal of normalization is to arrive at
identical strings after normalization even though they may not be linguistically ideal. If a note is a
way out to resolve the commentT.2, I need the text for such a note.
d. Mr. Mike Ksar: An informative note along the lines of what Dr. Asmus Freytag has mentioned canbe added to the amendment. When a better solution is developed in the future, the text can beamended.
e. Professor Kyongsok Kim: Even if we add a note to address the ROK comment, I cannot alter thevote on behalf the national committee.
f. Dr. Ken Whistler: I would like to suggest that during the context of attempting to disposition ofcomments that 'Request to Remove Clause 24 is not accepted.’ An informative note can be
added.
Disposition: ROK request to remove clause 24 is not accepted.
USA: Disapproval
T.1 Add Unicode BiDi algorithm as normative reference – accepted.
T.2 Request for 3 Greek characters – Capital Lunate Sigma, Capital Letter San and Small Letter San;
these were accepted based on discussion under agenda items 7.5 on page 23 and 7.11 on page 25.
T.3 change name for Noon Gunnah - accepted. See disposition of Irish comment T.1.
T.4 Request to add Vertical Line Extension - a new symbol; this character was accepted based on
discussion under agenda item 7.3 on page 22.
T.5
a. collection 105 should be RTL - accepted.
b. collection 110 -- should be 2B00-2B7F; fix the spelling of the block name on page 3 ofamendment. Accepted; the change is to 2B00-2BFF (ending is not 2B7F).
c. collection 63 - add wording- accepted.
d. remove collection 207 from collection 251
e. if Korean compatibility characters are accepted, a new collection for CJK compatibility
characters is proposed. It was decided in the discussion on US comment T.8 to drop thesecharacters from this amendment.
f. add Arrows collection entry and depending on disposition to e. above, ideograph collectionalso, as appropriate – accepted in principle.
T.6 end of block for Arrows to be changed; accepted to change from 2B7F to 2BFF (not to 2B7F asrequested by US).
T.7 Annexes Q and R overhaul in context of merging the two parts.
Discussion:
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 16 of 51
2003-08-26

a. Mr. Michel Suignard: The idea is to change the format of the Korean Names for mapping toenable quicker processing by direct look up of Hangul names. The information in Annex Q and R
are not readily machine processable. The idea is to make these available in soft copy format.
When we came up with the algorithm and short list, we were faced with a page count problem.
The page count is not a problem in soft copy form. Now we are suggesting providing only a list oflong names. We could use any method you prefer to get at the correct long names.
b. Professor Kyongsok Kim: Annex Q is really from the first edition or its amendment - it is probably
not so much used. However, Annex R we have to re-consider.
c. Dr. Asmus Freytag: It is much along the lines of converting to soft copy forms for items likenames lists. The idea is to have only the CD-ROM version; there is no printed version from ITTF.
One could create a print version from the information on the CD ROM.
d. Mr. Mike Ksar: The current format is not easily machine readable.
e. Mr. Michael Everson: You won't have to change the formatted pages - can we keep both?
f. Mr. Michel Suignard: The idea is to have only one form. Annex Q - current tables occupy 9
pages; 16 entries/line. The suggestion is to delete the current tables, create a new plain text
table -- one entry/line for program readable format 3400 AC00 xxxx xxxxx. Annex R - The current
names derivable from information in Annex R are not the formal names for these Hangul
syllables. We need a list of formal names.
g. Professor Kyongsok Kim: Except for the annotation, the current Annex R is adequate. It is only
ten pages long and easier to browse that compared to 100 pages of a printed text file. One does
not have to open the plain text fileh. Mr. Mike Ksar: The current edition of the standard will still be around and one can use that for thecurrent format.
i. Dr. Asmus Freytag: We have to seriously remind ourselves what the purpose of the standard is –i.e. to define that which has been standardized; it is not a user guide etc. We have to limit any
additional work on the editor and should not be going in any other direction, Otherwise we willlose sight of where we are going.
j. Mr. Michael Everson: In the earlier edition we had the complete set of long names. Because it
was useful for readability we produced the condensed version. It is disingenuous on part of theeditor to say that it is difficult to maintain a ten page convenient version of the document. Ireland
has maintained that a single long version of the full names is a good one but the PDF version of
the condensed version is equally useful.
k. Mr. Michel Suignard: The sorted name list for everything else is a plain text file. The proposal isto put Korean names on the same footing as the others. No one objected to the plain text file forthe names list. Redundant information should be avoided because it is difficult to maintain. The
same information will be made available in plain text file. I am not prepared to provide the same
information in two different forms.
l. Mr. Michael Everson: We do have the names in the table along with the code tables. Hangul
does not. I find the current Annex R handy from the usability of the standard. Annex R does not
lose any information. If an additional plain text file is to be made available it is fine too. If theeditor does not want to do additional work that is his privilege.
m. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The current Annex R does not provide the full actual names. It hints at thefull name. The convenience objective is questionable and the current Annex R is not adequate.
n. Mr. Mike Ksar: It looks like we should leave Annexes Q and R alone.
o. Dr. Ken Whistler: On behalf of the US national body, we do not have consensus to remove Annex
R as it is in the current document. It is an overreaction to state that Annex Q should not bechanged. It was a consensus to remove Annex Q.
p. Mr. Michel Suignard: In order to produce Annex Q modification, one needs to reformat Annex R
first. The disposition would be US comment will be partially accepted.
Disposition:
The editor was given the choice. In the final disposition document N2569R, the editor had decided toreplace Annex Q, and retain information in Annex R with a pointer to an additional plain text file.
T.8 - US requests the removal of FA70 to FAE9 - DPRK compatibility characters from thisamendment.
Discussion:
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 17 of 51
2003-08-26

a. Dr. Ken Whistler: The US spent a considerable amount of time reviewing the compatibility
characters in the amendment. Some were apparently clerical errors by movement off by one
code position in lining things up. There were other instances where the mappings were not quite
right. There were still some more characters that were in Extension C. There were someinconsistencies. Given that the compatibility characters are extremely sensitive to normalization,
till we fix the open questions on these characters, the safest thing to do is to postpone inclusionof these characters at this time.
b. Dr. Asmus Freytag: N2540 - Chart FA60--FAFF block was displayed on the screen. We also got
some of the glyphs were wrong. Document N2540 contains the corrected glyphs for the codetable based on DPRK input. Document N2566 is the result of correcting the glyphs and thenstudying the proposal. Document N2566 classifies the problems into different groups - one set isthe Extension C, the second set is based on looking at the Glyphs. The mapping is the definition
behind these compatibility characters, and if the mapping is wrong, the definition is wrong. The
Unicode consortium agrees that these compatibility characters should be carefully reviewed
before adding to the standard. They should not be included in this amendment.
c. Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi: In Dublin we found that the DPRK set is acceptable. It should stay. Why
are the mappings not consistent?
d. Dr. Asmus Freytag: I received a set of 150 glyphs from DPRK. They were not in the orderproposed for the table. I worked off of a document which showed which font corresponded towhich code point etc. In the process of building the charts, which is susceptible to input errors,
errors did creep in. I have the shape of the unified ideograph and the compatibility character and
if I had compared them then some of the mapping errors would not have crept in. Document
N2540 has a limited collection of glyphs for which visual close matches could be found.
Document N2540 was sent to ideographic character review by an expert on behalf of Unicode.
IRG did the complete review and the results are in N2566. Some characters should be NEW.
Some of the compatibility mappings should be to Extension B instead of to the BMP.
e. Mr. Ham Myong Ho: After reviewing document N2366, DPRK experts recognize that there aresome problems. We could review these more carefully, but would like the mapping to be
included in this amendment. Professor Kyongsok Kim helped interpret Mr. Ham Myong Ho's
input.
f. Mr. Mike Ksar: It looks these are two conflicting positions. If you admit there are problems thesecannot be included now.
g. Dr. Asmus Freytag: Does the document N2540 reflect the mapping accurately or not?
h. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: Would like to know what problems did the DPRK experts discover new?
i. Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi: Concerning document N2566 almost all the issues were all discussed in
the Korean ad hoc in Dublin. Some of the changes proposed seem to be based on preferenceson characters being separated or unified etc. If US input is to withdraw the DPRK proposal, US
should give us some more evidence to say that these should not be included in the compatibility
set.
j. Dr. Asmus Freytag: As far as I understand the issues, repeating input from Dr. Lee Collins - themost troubling aspect of the issues are the cases where we have the potential for adding thesecharacters now and then the same characters come in with Extension C -- we would like to avoid
that. Dr. Lee Collins has identified that some characters are not the same based on glyphs;
these should not be added as unified ideographs. Both these cases are troubling. The otherlarge case is that mapping that has been provided and our view is that mapping to a different
unified ideograph may be preferred. I do not know the reasons for the preference. Howeverchanging the mapping once these are standardized will be trouble some. If there is any chancethese will change then we prefer to avoid.
k. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: I would like to explain N2540's content including some errors. I find the
document is excellent in explaining the problem. As a result of the mapping exercise, they
dropped a few of the characters from the original proposal. N2493 was the result of the ad hoc
exercise in Dublin. FAA5 is claimed to be compatibility equivalent of 7070, US claims that it may
be mapped to 2F835. We have reviewed the 2Fxxx already in Dublin. The shapes are slightly
different, but the preference was made in Dublin. The mapping error claimed FA7E to U 585A. U
585C is preferred by US for the Korean character. It is quite different. US claims non unifiables.
U69CB with FA9F. FADF and U 233D5. The dictionary says that these instances are different,
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 18 of 51
2003-08-26

sometimes they occur with dots. In some cases, 699D and 6A27 could be unified. The middle
component of this has difference in a dot. According to Annex S “can be unified” applies only forthis specific instance. In general it is not unifiable. We compared the compatibility characters;
we did that with those in the standard. Extension B was not compared. If there is unification ofcompatibility character, then we could discover some.
l. Mr. Mike Ksar: There are some errors in the current FPDAM. In Dublin we did not check with
Extension B. I think we should also look at Extension C mapping to avoid not having to take out
these characters. Once these characters go in they cannot be taken out -- we have to take all thecare to avoid problems in the future.
m. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: The errors occurred in the FPDAM due to editorial process and not in the
input proposed in Dublin.
n. Dr. Asmus Freytag: I would suggest we take the input from Mr. Yasuhiro Anan into an ad hoc.
o. Mr. Takayuki Mr. Takayuki Sato: Are we going to change the unification rule for Extension C? If
IRG proposes change of unification rule, existing Unified ideographs can have problems. The
extension C is only a proposal. It is better to state that extension C must not include characters
already included than the other way. It is our current principles.
p. Mr. Michel Suignard: We do have different process for unified CJK and compatibility characters.
There are several processes outside of WG2, whether a character is compatibility or unified
makes a difference. It is important to keep that in mind. Also, we cannot propose a character in
Extension C as well as in the compatibility area.
q. Mr. Michael Everson: Compatibility characters were more interesting in 1993 than now...
r. Mr. Mike Ksar: I would suggest an ad hoc. The ad hoc will consist of Messrs. Yasuhiro Anan,
Asmus Freytag, James Seng, Ken Whistler, Tatsuo Kobayashi, Ri Kwang Ho, Ham Myong Ho,
Kyongsok Kim, Zhang Zhoucai and Takayuki Sato (who will lead the ad hoc).
s. Mr. Takayuki Sato: Document N2530 is another document for the ad hoc to consider in addition
to N2540, N2566 and N2541.
t. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: I hope we can limit the topic to compatibility characters only.
u. Mr. Mike Ksar: Extension C is not on the agenda but it is relevant to our discussion at this time.
v. Mr. Takayuki Sato: A brief interim report - the ad hoc group agreed on which is the base
document among the different documents. We categorized the topics into four kinds.
Should we unify the compatibility characters or not;Is the same character is in Extension B;
The third and fourth topics are related to Extension C.
The first topic is the most important one to address.
w. Mr. Mike Ksar: The ad hoc has identified the areas to look into because there are issues related
to the mapping of the compatibility characters to the characters in the BMP, to Extension B andfuture mappings to Extension C. From the identified issues so far, it looks like the current set 122
compatibility characters is immature for inclusion in the current amendment, unless the issues areresolved before the end of this meeting. Even though they have been accepted in Dublin and arein the current amendment text, we may have to postpone their inclusion. You can continue towork towards resolving all the open issues at this meeting, and via email in the future. We haveto make sure that there are no open issues or questions about them before including them in thestandard. This is the standard procedure WG2 follows.
Document N2573 – DPRK ad hoc group’s report
Document N2573 containing the report from the Korean DPRK Compatibility Characters ad hocgroup was presented by Mr. Yasuhiro Anan
Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: We reviewed the original proposal, meeting with experts from DPRK and US.
The base document should be document N2540 from Unicode. We reviewed each character in thecode chart; found two errors in document N2566 from the US experts. Six characters were found as
C1 candidates. We confirmed with IRG experts that these six will be taken out from C1 and unified
with existing CJK characters. On the possible mapping with existing compatibility characters - after
reviewing thirteen characters from DPRK are agreed to be removed from the original 122 set. The
debatable points are - although from DPRK point of view, there are two synonymous characters
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 19 of 51
2003-08-26

should go into compatibility list, because they are variants of existing ones. However, per existing
IRG rules, these should not be unified. These two characters will be removed from the compatibility
list and moved to Extension C list. A revised document containing 122 less the above 15
compatibility characters will be produced as an update of document N2540. The preference is toremove the vacated holes and bring them together.
Discussion:a. Dr. Ken Whistler: The ad hoc report has to state which characters are to be removed. The 13 arefrom the existing set in document N2540, leaving a total of 109? What are the other two?
b. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: The following 15 are to be removed from the current list in the amendment:
FAA5, FAE1, FAE6, FA7C, FA88, FA8D, FA93, FA9C, FAB7, FABC, FAD1, FAD2, FA8C, andFA9F and FA90. The total drops from 122 to 107.
c. Dr. Ken Whistler: I really appreciate the work of ad hoc to clarify these. We will be removing
these 15 leaving different holes. The US preference would be to simply remove these and leave
the holes, to avoid the potential for errors creeping in moving the glyphs, lining up etc. at the
FDAM-2 to Part 1 stage, instead of closing up the holes.
d. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: Leaving the holes in the charts is perfectly acceptable – per the US comment.
e. Mr. Mike Ksar: I do not have confidence that we will not find more errors. All the ad hoc work
should have happened before the WG2 meeting after Dublin. The chance of having errors that
we cannot back off from is still great. We have two alternatives – accept US request to postpone
the addition of these characters giving us some more time to study the ad hoc group’s output –this is my preference. The second alternative is to accept the ad hoc result for the 107 and takethe risk of not being able to back off – if we take this alternative the US comment will be only
partially accepted. May be the holes should be left in.
f. Professor Kyongsok Kim: We have checked the results of the ad hoc very carefully, and RoK’s
position is to accept these.
g. Mr. Ri Kwang HO: DPRK would like to go ahead with the ad hoc results.
h. Mr. Mike Ksar: I want you to fully realize that if there are errors you have to live with them in thestandards.
i. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: We have checked these carefully. Once these are encoded we will notchange mappings on the compatibility characters. We want to hear from DPRK that there are noerrors since future corrections will not be possible.
j. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: We in China are against compatibility characters in general.
k. Mr. Takayuki Sato: Japan will support the revised proposal from the ad hoc.
l. Dr. Asmus Freytag: Proposing the removal of 13 from the list is reducing the chance of merely
clerical errors by a large amount. It will have some implications on the implementation from being
able to track all the holes etc. US, Japan, DPRK, RoK and China -- these national bodies should
help out the editor by reviewing the final charts before the end of the meeting.
m. Mr. Mike Ksar: The members of WG2, especially the ad hoc members, should review the charts
before the resolutions are taken.
n. Mr. Michael Everson: It will be prudent to wait unless there is some enormous urgency for these.
When I hear the convener saying that we have 30 minutes to agree ……
o. Dr. Umamaheswaran: I have a question to DPRK – will it be a problem for DPRK to giveourselves more time to review the ad hoc results by everyone concerned to eliminate chances oferrors. Is there any urgency for coding? We had an agreed upon set in Dublin, and at thismeeting we find removing 13 of these based on comments received – I do not have confidence
that the set from the ad hoc is stable.
p. Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi: It will not be included in the current amendment? For a future
amendment?
q. Mr. Mike Ksar: We can accept the results in principle and include them in the next amendment tothe standard. If there is no urgency we can include them in the next amendment. I would like toknow why we cannot wait till the next amendment giving ourselves more time and opportunity toreview the results.
r. Mr., Ri Kwang HO: We have checked everything now.
s. Mr. Yasuhiro Anan: In principle we can reduce the number of characters - not because of the
Dublin output was incorrect. After review to accommodate the US comments, we agreed toremove 13, not because these are considered to be mapping errors.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 20 of 51
2003-08-26

t.

Professor Kyongsok Kim: Regarding the reliability of the ad hoc results – the ad hoc report has
the information.
u. Mr. Ri Kwang HO: We will take the WG2 advice and verify the ad hoc results for inclusion at thenext meeting.
v. Mr. Mike Ksar: Thank you for your cooperation.
Disposition: Accept US comment in full – removing FA70—FAE9 from the current amendment.
Draft a resolution accepting the ad hoc report in principle, for encoding in the next amendment to thestandard. Invite all national bodies to comment on the ad hoc’s output.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.3 (Compatibility Hanja characters):
No: Japan
Yes: Canada, China, Finland, Iran, Ireland, DPR of Korea, Republic of Korea, Singapore, USA
WG2 accepts the removal of 122 Compatibility Hanja characters FA70 to FAE9 from FPDAM-2 to
ISO/IEC 10646-1. WG2 provisionally accepts, and invites DPRK and other interested parties to review,the refined replacement set of 107 Compatibility Hanja characters (see Korean ad hoc report in document
N 2573, corrections to the FPDAM-2 charts in document N2540, and the code chart showing the 107
characters in document N2572) for further consideration at the next WG2 meeting.
WG2 expresses its appreciation for the excellent cooperation and hard work done by the participants in
the Korean ad hoc group in arriving at their recommendations.
T.9 -- glyph change for Syrian Abbreviation Mark
Accepted in principle - the glyph will have an additional line segment dot-line-dot-line-dot instead ofwhat is on page 7 of N2541.
T.10 Annex F, Soft Hyphen Format Character(See Agenda item 9.3 on page 37 for the proposal and discussion).
Accept in principle. An informative note is being proposed – the editor is to finalize the wording. As aresult of the discussion, the GLYPH for 'Mongolian Todo Soft Hyphen' has to change. This character
did not go into the list of format characters in the standard, therefore does not have to be removed.
Progression of Amendment:
See final disposition of comments based on the above discussion in document N2569R. The
amendment is progressed to the next stage – FDAM2. Editor will prepare FDAM text and send toSC2 secretariat.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.1 (Additions / Corrections for FPDAM-2 of 10646-1):
Unanimous
WG2 resolves:a. To add the following to the BMP:
1. 23D0 VERTICAL LINE EXTENSION, with the glyph as a vertical line consistent with theglyphs for vertical arrows
2. 03F9 GREEK CAPITAL LUNATE SIGMA SYMBOL with the glyph shown in document N2512
3. 03FA GREEK CAPITAL LETTER SAN with a glyph similar to that shown in the sign column
on page 4 of document N2522
4. 03FB GREEK SMALL LETTER SAN with a glyph similar to that shown in the sign column on
page 4 of document N2522
5. 1D6B LATIN SMALL LETTER UE with the glyph shown on page 1 of document N2514
6. 0B71 ORIYA LETTER WA with the glyph shown on the right within the circled pair on page 2of document N2525
andb. To correct the glyph for 0B35 ORIYA LETTER VA to the glyph on the left side within the circled
pair on page 2 of document N2525.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 21 of 51
2003-08-26

WG2 further instructs its project editor to include the above additions and correction in the text for FDAM2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
M43.4 (Disposition of comments – FPDAM-2 to 10646-1):
No: Republic of Korea
Yes: Canada, China, Finland, Iran, Ireland, Japan, DPR of Korea, Singapore, USA
WG2 instructs its editor to prepare the final disposition of comments to ballot on FPDAM-2 to 10646-1
based on document N2541 and discussion at this meeting, including the following notable changes:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Change LTR to RTL in the name for collection 105
Interchange glyphs for 060D and 060E
Move character at 0659 to 0615
Rename FDFD to ARABIC LIGATURE BISMILLAH AR-RAHMAN AR-RAHEEM
Rename 0658 to ARABIC MARK NOON GHUNNA
Add a clarification note regarding normalization, such as“Note: The goal of normalization is to arrive at unique strings after normalization even though they
may not be optimal for some purposes.”g. Change definition of Collection 110 to 2B00-2BFF
h. Annex Q: Add a machine readable version of the mapping informationi. Annex R: Add a machine readable version of the full names for Hangul Syllables
j. Modify the glyph for 070F SYRIAC ABBREVIATION MARK
k. Update the informative note regarding 00AD SOFT HYPHEN in clause F.1.1 and modify the glyph for1806 MONGOLIAN TODO SOFT HYPHEN accordingly.
M43.5 (Progression of Amendment 2 to 10646-1):
No: Republic of Korea
Abstention: Japan
Yes: Canada, China, Finland, Iran, Ireland, DPR of Korea, Singapore, USA
WG2 instructs its project editor to prepare the text for FDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1, based on thedisposition of comments per resolution M43.4 above, and including other accepted changes fromresolutions M43.1 through M43.3 above. WG2 further instructs its editor to submit the disposition ofcomments and the FDAM-2 text to the SC2 secretariat for FDAM ballot, with the unchanged completion
target date of 2003-04.

7.2

Latinized Taiwanese

Input document:
2507
Proposal Summary Form – Latinized Taiwanese; Department of Language Education of National Taitung
Teachers College; 2002-10-18

Taiwan had requested withdrawal of this agenda item for this meeting.

7.3

Vertical Line Extension character

Input document:
2508
Proposal Summary Form to add VERTICAL LINE EXTENSION character; Unicode Technical Committee – Eric
Muller; 2002-10-30

Dr. Ken Whistler: This character is part of an existing set of glyph parts and is missing from the set that isin the standard. It is to be grouped with other miscellaneous technical symbols. UTC and US body havereviewed this proposal from Mr. Eric Muller from Adobe, and agreed that this character is missing fromthe set and should be included to complete the set. The proposal summary form in document N2508
contains the details.
Discussion:a. Mr. Mike Ksar: This character is an omission from the set.
b. Mr. Michael Everson: The glyph is missing in document N2508.
c. Dr. Ken Whistler: The glyph is simply a vertical line. Adobe system has sent the glyph to thecontributing editor.
d. Zhang: Where can we see the glyph?
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 22 of 51
2003-08-26

e. Dr. Asmus Freytag: It is similar to Horizontal Line which goes from end to end of the character cell,
but in the vertical direction. It will be included in the code charts.
Disposition: Accept the proposed VERTICAL LINE EXTENSION character at 23D0.
See relevant resolution M43.1 at the end of item 7.1 on page 14.

7.4

Shaping behavior of Syriac character for Sogdian & Persian

Input document:
2509
Shaping behaviour of six Syriac letters for Sogdian and Persian; Michael Everson and Nicholas SimsWilliams; 2002-11-05

Mr. Michael Everson: This document completes an action item from Dublin meeting. I was requested toprovide information on shaping behaviour of the six Syriac characters that we accepted in the previous
meeting. Myself and Mr., Nicholas Sims-Williams worked on this document. We worked on the
typography of these characters. The fonts themselves are based on a font that is freely distributed by
Syriac organization.
Dr. Asmus Freytag: Unicode consortium will take this as input.
Disposition: There is no action for WG2.

7.5

Greek Capital Lunate Sigma Symbol

Input document:
2512
Proposal Summary Form to add the Greek Capital Lunate Sigma Symbol to the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae
Graecae Project (University of California, Irvine) – via UTC; 2002-11-06

Dr. Ken Whistler: Document N2512 is contributed by a group of linguists from University of California,
Irvine. They also have another contribution N2522. Document N2512 provides information from Greek
scholars from Thesaurus and Linguae Graecae project. The lower case Lunate Sigma Symbol wasadded recently to the standard. In the context of review of the additions, they found that the lower case
Lunate Sigma has an uppercase counterpart and is available in Greek literature. Exhibits are included in
document N2512. We now have the evidence for the uppercase Lunate Sigma Symbol also. The US
and UTC have reviewed this and have the position that this character should be included. The namedoes not have the word 'letter' in it.
Disposition: Accept the proposed GREEK CAPITAL LUNATE SIGMA SYMBOL at 03F9; with the glyph
shown in document N2512 (looks like an upper case C).
See relevant resolution M43.1 at the end of item 7.1 on page 14.

7.6

Six new HKSCS characters from HKSAR

Input document:
2513
Proposal Summary Form to add 6 HKSCS symbols; Francis Chuen – ITSD, Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region; 2002-10-25

Document N2513 proposes six new characters. Two are symbols and four are precomposed letters.
Discussion:a. Mr. Michael Everson: WG2 policy is not to encode precomposed characters. We need more
information about these. The statement that these are in the national standard is insufficient reason.
b. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: Hong Kong representative at IRG indicated that many existing
implementations use precomposed characters even if they are based on Unicode. I am not sure
such information is sufficient for accepting precomposed characters.
c. Mr. Michel Suignard: The precomposed characters can be represented by sequences. Withnormalization even if we encode precomposed characters they get lost as single characters. There isno point in adding precomposed characters in the standard due to the normalization.
d. Dr. Ken Whistler: The set of tones is incomplete. Even if we accept these proposed characters, it will
be incomplete. Symbol in item 5 – seems to be a representation of Ground Symbol used in Electricalcircuit diagrams etc. The name is misleading also. Symbol in item 6 seems to be also a circuit
symbol. It is not obvious. I would like to get more information about these symbols from HKSAR. As
it is presented we need more information about their use.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 23 of 51
2003-08-26

Disposition: Cannot accept four precomposed characters since they can already be encoded. WG2
requests HKSAR for more information on the usage of the two symbols – items 5 and 6 in document
N2513.
Action item: Mr. Zhang Zhoucai to communicate the disposition to HKSAR.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.8 (6 characters from Hong Kong SAR):
Unanimous
With reference to the request for four precomposed characters and two symbols in document N2513 fromHKSAR, WG2 resolves to reject the request for four precomposed characters since combining sequencesin the standard can be used to represent these. Further, WG2 invites HKSAR to provide moreclarification on the usage of the two proposed symbols.

7.7

Latin letter - ue

Input document:
2514
Proposal to encode one Latin letter, ue, in the UCS; Everson; 2002-11-09

Mr. Michael Everson: At the Dublin WG2 meeting two different lexicographical use characters -- double
diacritics -- were shown by the US. I noticed that one more character from that lexicographical tradition
was missing. The request is to add this missing character at 1D6B LATIN SMALLETER UE with glyph
shown on page 1 of document N2514.
Discussion:a. Mr. Klaas Ruppel: Will this have a lower case or upper case equivalent?
b. Mr. Michael Everson: In the current use, it is only on phonetic character and not in a normal
orthography. We found another instance where we had only one case and we discovered the use of
the uppercase version of that.
c. Mr. Mike Ksar: We still are going to call it SMALL. We will encode only the small letter.
Disposition: Accept the proposed character at 1D6B with the name LATIN SMALLETER UE and glyph
shown on page 1 of document N2514.
See relevant resolution M43.1 at the end of item 7.1 on page 14.

7.8

Addition of 3 Hanja character references to part 1

Input document:
2517
Proposal to add 3 Hanja char in 10646-1; Committee for Standardization (CSK) – DPR Korea; 2002-11-01

Discussion:a. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: IRG reviewed two documents N2517 as well as N2518 (for Part 2). We
recommended to DPRK that they have another internal review in DPRK and double check. Theremay be more. They agreed in the IRG meeting that they will review these two documents andresubmit to IRG for review. The current DPRK delegates at this meeting were not at the IRG. From
IRG N491 minutes document - “Although the quality of the mapping data is responsibility of thesource, IRG is willing to assist in the quality assurance. IRG recommends to DPRK further review
and IRG is willing to review at its next meeting”.
b. Mr. Ri Kwang Ho: These documents were sent to IRG. IRG has considered these. DPRK will besending additional contribution to IRG. We have reviewed this input.
c. Mr. Mike Ksar: The proposal from IRG to DPRK was to include these in a future amendment. My
understanding is that IRG has reviewed the DPRK input in documents N2517 and N2518, and IRG
has asked DPRK to do some additional reviews and it seems that these proposals are not ready forinclusion now.
Action item: DPRK is to revise their proposals in documents N2517 and N2518 and get them reviewed
with IRG before submitting to WG2, for future inclusion into the standard. We thank the IRG forvolunteering to assist DPRK in the review of the quality of the mapping.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 24 of 51
2003-08-26

Relevant resolution(s):M43.10 (Request for additional Hanja Character Source References):
Unanimous
With reference to the request from DPR of Korea for three Hanja character source references indocument N2517, and two Hanja character source references in document N2518, WG2 invites DPRK toreview these proposed references, with assistance from the IRG, prior to re-submitting the requests for
future consideration by WG2.

7.9

Addition of one Oriya letter

Input document:
2525
On Oriya VA and WA, and a proposal to encode one Oriya letter in the UCS; Michael Everson and Anthony
Stone; 2002-11-21

Mr. Michael Everson: The contribution in document N2525 is from Mr. Anthony Stone - an expert in
Sanskrit and other Indic scripts. The letter VA is in the current FPDAM-2 consideration. There are twoletters VA and WA in Oriya -- VA is a BA with a DOT in it. The second is WA. Exhibits are shown in the
document. Page 2 shows both side by side. The proposal is to change the glyph of U+0B35 ORIYALETTER VA to the one with the DOT in it; and add the second letter ORIYA LETTER WA at U+0B71.
Discussion:a. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The Indian document gives the Letter VA with the Glyph for VA at the location
requested.
b. Mr. Michael Everson: I will communicate the addition of the character to Indian experts.
Disposition:
Accept the new character, U+0B71 -- ORIYA LETTER WA with the glyph on the right of the two shown
circled on page 2.
Correct the Glyph for U+0B35 -- ORIYA LETTER VA with the glyph on the left of the two shown circled on
page 2.
Action item: Mr. Michael Everson will communicate the addition of the character to Indian experts.
See relevant resolution M43.1 at the end of item 7.1 on page 14.

7.10 Afghani sign
Input document:
2523
Proposal to encode the AFGHANI SIGN in the UCS; Everson; 2002-11-20

Mr. Michael Everson: There is some work ongoing with UN support on Afghani languages. One
implementer of Afghan fonts communicated to Unicode list that there is a currency sign for AFGHANI – aglyph representing the abbreviation afg (with dot above g). Document N2523 shows a keyboard layout
and a glyph for this character. There has been subsequent discussion with Mr. Liwal – to get scanned
samples of this sign. Another font provider for Pashto has a symbol for this sign. The UN development
program would like to get more confirmation about use of these symbols in current practice – they have
not received confirming responses yet.
Disposition: WG2 will await more information from the author.
Action item: Mr. Michael Everson will contact the authors and get further input.

7.11 Greek Letter San
Input document:
2522
Proposal to encode the Greek Capital Letter San and Greek Small Letter San in the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae
Graecae Project (University of California, Irvine) – via Unicode; 2002-11-07

Dr. Ken Whistler: These two characters were previously not known before. They are in archaic use. Now
the TLG group has provided sufficient documentation.
Discussion:a. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader: The glyph is not shown in the exhibit in document 4. The character thatlooks like Small Letter San is NU.
b. Mr. Michael Everson: We can proceed with the contribution; we know the character exists; though thelowercase versions are not always seen on the stone carving exhibit.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 25 of 51
2003-08-26

c.

Dr. Asmus Freytag: I have received the complete set of fonts from TLG. I can realize the character.
The Unicode can take the word of the experts from TLG for the existence of such a character, eventhough the document does not have the exhibit.
d. Seng: I am concerned that there is no printed output containing these characters.
e. Dr. Ken Whistler: I don’t think the typography of these characters should be a concern of WG2 -- interms of similarities with the Greek characters etc.
f. Mr. Michel Suignard: The glyphs that were sent to the contributing editor by the TLG should havebeen printed in the contribution; we would like to see it.
Disposition: Accept the two characters 03FA - GREEK CAPITAL LETTER SAN and 03FB - GREEK
SMALL LETTER SAN with glyphs similar to those shown in examples on page 4 in the 'sign' column. The
code charts prepared by the contributing editor will contain the correct glyphs.
See relevant resolution M43.1 at the end of item 7.1 on page 14.

7.12 Devanagari Glottal Stop
Input document:
2543
Proposal to add Devanagari Glottal Stop; Peter Constable, Steve Smith; 2002-11-01

Mr. Michael Everson: I will introduce this on behalf of Mr. Peter Constable. We encountered thischaracter also when were encoding Limbu. Page 5 has some evidence. Historically this character isderived from Latin Glottal Stop. The glyph has a matra over it. I would recommend we accept thischaracter.
Discussion:a. Dr. Umamaheswaran: It is most likely that this character will go into Devanagari block. Would like to
get some feedback from other users of the script as well.
b. Dr. Ken Whistler: The central government of India may not have a policy for support of suchcharacters for minority scripts. Such characters will be required for minority scripts both inside andoutside of India. Devanagari script is not a property of India.
c. Dr. Asmus Freytag: Since we will be targeting this into the Devanagari block it is preferable to getsome feedback from other users of Devanagari such as Government of India as suggested by Dr.
Umamaheswaran.
d. Mr. Michel Suignard: There are still many opportunities for review and feedback from several users ofDevanagari.
Disposition: Good candidate for inclusion in the next amendment. Will be reconsidered for confirmation
at the next meeting.
Action item: Authors are requested to get some feedback from Government of India (for example fromDr. Om Vikas).

7.13 Greek Metrical Symbols
Input document:
2546
Proposal for encoding Greek Metrical Symbols in the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae Graecae Project (University ofCalifornia, Irvine); 2002-11-07

Dr. Ken Whistler: UTC has been working extensively with some of the experts on Greek from the TLG
project in University of California, Irvine. In addition to the characters we accepted earlier, they havebrought forward some more characters for other uses of Greek. The set of 9 characters in document
N2546 are in the context of Greek Poetry. Page 6 contains the names, suggested code points andglyphs. These have undergone extensive discussion in the UTC. The example of use is shown on page
3. US would like to see these encoded. However, we would like the national bodies to have an
opportunity to review and feedback.
Discussion:a. Mr. Michael Everson: I notice the proposed names do not contain the word Greek in them. It is a niceidea. I would like to see some evidence of use of symbols 7, 8 and 9.
b. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader: By removing the name Greek from these characters, you may be loosing
some information. For example, if there are similar ones in Hindi they may have other shapes.
c. Dr. Ken Whistler: The examples show that these symbols are used not only in Greek but in also otherlanguage scholarly texts -–the names of characters are not including the name Greek in them. There
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 26 of 51
2003-08-26

are more extensive examples in the location cited on top of page 6. These characters are usedwidely in discussions about Greek poetry in different languages. If there are similar characters in
Hindi but with different shapes, they should be brought forward in a different proposal.
Action Item: All national bodies are invited to provide feedback. It will be considered for a future
amendment at the next meeting.

7.14 Glagolitic script – revised proposal
Input document:
2555
Revised proposal for encoding the Glagolitic script in the UCS; Michael Everson and Ralph Cleminson; 200212-04

Mr. Michael Everson: The first proposal in document N1659 on Glagolitic script was presented to WG2about 5 years ago. Most of the input came from TC46. There were questions about variants used in the
TC46 standards. This proposal is not a transposition of the TC46 standards. It has been reviewed byother scholars. There was another proposal made in document N1931. The current proposal in
document N2555 is very mature. Some of the open questions have been pointed out in the document –for example, the variants. It could be dealt with VS-1. I would like to get these accepted for inclusion at
the next meeting.
Discussion:a. Dr. Asmus Freytag: I would strongly caution against the use of VS-s on an ad hoc basis. They have
proven to be tricky little beasts. I would like to see their use be carefully considered. If we use themsystematically, for example, the mathematical symbols, or for ideographs, we could expect thesoftware do the right thing consistently. If it is tied to a general particle in the language VS may be
the inappropriate thing to use due to interactions with search etc. The VS-s can get dropped in text incertain circumstances.
b. Mr. Michel Suignard: Suggestion would be reconsider use of VS-s versus separate coding. There isa case where folding property has to be noted. Is the block end at 5F or 7F?
c. Mr. Michael Everson: In early Cyrillic, there are lots of variations for some of the sounds. One would
not want to encode all the variants due to interactions with sort, search etc. Discussion with Ralph
Cleminson did not conclude on this character being separated or not. There is an initial 090a and090b; this is nothing with shaping behavior. It appears in the initial position than elsewhere. The
transliteration differs somewhat from the current system used for Cyrillic – it is better.
d. Dr. Ken Whistler: The feedback you are getting about use of VS is not to use the VS. The caseproperty has to be brought to the attention of users. The property Lo should be changed to Lu and Ll.
Implications to case folding must be mentioned. The block should be called out to be 6 columns – fixtable in page 9. Check the glyph for Spidery Ha – they do not match.
Action item: Authors are invited to submit a revised proposal based on above feedback. Other national
bodies are to review and feedback.

7.15 Ol Chiki - revised proposal and feedback
Input document:
2505
Revised proposal for encoding the Ol Chiki script in the UCS; Michael Everson, R. C. Hansdah & N. C.
Murmu; 2002-11-03
2561
The need and practicalities to encode the ‘Roman Script Santali’ In the universal character set – a protest
against efforts to encode the ‘Ol Chiki’ in the universal character set; Divyendu Raska; 2002-12-06
2562
Response to N2561 – Santali; Deborah W. Anderson; 2002-12-06

Mr. Mike Ksar: Document N1956 was the first proposal. Documents N2561 and N2562 will be removed
from WG2 doc registry – authors have to resubmit the contents in technical terms, removing languagethat is considered inappropriate in a submission to WG2.
Mr. Michael Everson: Referring to document N2505, this script is used by Santali community in India.
They used other scripts such as Devanagari, Bengali, Oriya and Roman scripts earlier, the Ol Chiki script
is used by Pandit Raghunath Murmu etc. We did receive a complaint from an individual that the Latin
script is being used for this language. They cited a report from Government of Bengal. It clearly
indicated current use of this script contra what was indicated by the complainant.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 27 of 51
2003-08-26

Discussion:
Dr. Ken Whistler: Suggest inclusion of the citation from Bengal government. Page 5 has two sets ofnames for the same code position. This has to be fixed with the final recommendation. If the West
Bengal report uses specific names or transliteration system you could use that to be closer to the user
community’s usage.
Action Item: Authors are invited to revise the proposal based on the feedback. NB feedback.

7.16 Tibetan BrdaRten characters
Input document:
2558
Proposal on Tibetan BrdaRten Characters Encoding for 10646 - BMP; NB China; 2002-12-06

Mr. Lobsong Tokme: I would like to extend our complements to WG2. The document N2558 proposes
956 precomposed BrdaRten characters. The reasons are given in the document. This character set isused since 1990 in existing systems for educational purposes. This document was distributed only on
Friday – national bodies have not seen this.
Discussion:a. Mr. Michel Suignard: There are in fact existing working implementations today – they are not public
yet. Tibetan block as encoded in 10646 is used today. There are prototypes today and the current
10646 block is satisfactory. The current document ignores completely the relationship between theexisting Tibetan coding and the new proposal.
b. Mr. Michael Everson: This document relates to the existing standardized characters. It uses theexisting character sequences and shows precomposed characters. At one stage China did submit
5000 precomposed glyphs / syllables for Tibetan. We had discussion in WG2 about the foundersystem, how it manipulates glyphs for publishing etc. and how it was important for Tibetan. It wasperceived that one has to be flexible enough to be able to go beyond the 5000 glyphs. It could notencompass Mongolian in Tibetan script within the 5000. There are some vendors, in the Westanyway, who have used the current standard. By use of appropriate font technology you will be able
to create the beautiful glyphs you have presented in this document. All the proposed characters canbe represented by sequences. It would not be possible to encode precomposed characters.
c. Dr. Ken Whistler: This proposal is for 956 characters for the BMP. In your discussion you mentionedthat you may need as much as 7000. Is it your intention to bring forward the remaining character in
the SMP?
d. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: I asked the Tibetan experts the same question. Several years ago the Tibetan
experts had submitted a large number of characters. It is widely used in publishing in Tibet. Basedon several years of research in Tibet, big compromise has been made to bring the total number down
to about 1000. These are widely and frequently used, and cover 100 percent of modern usage of thelanguage. The original number was about 10000, but less than 1000 is enough to satisfy the modernuse.
e. Mr. Michael Everson: Every single one of these can already be represented in 10646 by sequences.
It is possible to create many more syllables. These 1000 syllables may be adequate for modern
usage. These are Glyphs in a Font and need not be in the standard as precomposed characters.
The answer to the question on composite sequences is – YES they can be precomposed.
f. Mr. Takayuki Sato: I have a question of transition from existing data to 10646. It is possible toconvert into 10646 strings. If it is not possible to do the conversion then we can entertain any missing
characters. The requirement for the large set of precomposed characters is not justified. Use ofChinese, English, Tibetan etc. should not force you to stay in Level 1 implementation only. Level 3
can be used.
g. Mr. Mike Ksar: In our Principles and Procedures document, if a character can be represented by a
combining sequence, we will not encode the combined character as a separate character. Thisshould be made clear to the Tibetan experts.
h. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: I know that. They know that. However, these characters are used as single units
for input, presentation etc. The modern Tibetan can be covered by 1000 characters. They realizethat it is possible to convert between the basic Tibetan and the composed characters. It is not one to
one with existing implementations. It is used in many places. They do not want to change the datatypes etc. from what it is.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 28 of 51
2003-08-26

i.

Mr. Mike Ksar: All of these can be accommodated by using the combining sequences and mappings.
If some precomposed character cannot be generated / represented using the basic Tibetan
repertoire, then we can entertain new requests.
j. Mr. Chen Zhuang: These characters are defacto industrial standard in China for Tibetan software.
Even software from outside of China do support these. If the BMP will not support these, there will besome difficulty converting existing software to using the sequences.
k. Mr. Mike Ksar: This proposal goes against the current Principles and Procedures in WG2. We cannot
have duplicate encoding of these characters. If we accommodate the Tibetan request, then it will
also open up the floodgate for many such requests from other national bodies.
l. Mr. Michel Suignard: Clause 6.6 – in the standard – we can define a document listing sequence
identifiers for each character that you need. Mr. Michael Everson has volunteered to help in this.
m. Dr. Ken Whistler: I would like to take this back to the US. I still have not got an answer to myquestion. I understand the clarification that the 956 or so is sufficient for modern Tibetan. My
question is – does the Chinese national body, intend to come back with more requests for Mongolian
written in Tibetan scripts etc. Since we know that there are other combinations, will China not bringfuture proposals for additional characters?
n. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: The answer is no. We will accept the combining method for Classical Tibetan;
they may have other approaches such as PUA use etc. for others. For Modern Tibetan usage, theproposed set is enough for 100 percent use.
o. Mr. Lobsong Tokme: We need 956 characters for the best solution for modern Tibetan. We canchoose other methods for going beyond the modern Tibetan. It is important for us.
p. Dr. Ken Whistler: Another factual question I have is on the data you are talking about. For the
gigabytes of data using the Founder System, what is the repertoire? Are there characters in theFounder system that are outside the 956 set? It is an extension of GB2312 - are there characters in
the database beyond the 956 in today’s archives?
q. Mr. Lobsong Tokme: The data archives are based on Basic Tibetan consonants and these 956
proposed combined characters.
Action item: This proposal is the first submission for WG2 consideration. It cannot be included in current
amendments. National bodies are asked to provide feedback to WG2 by next meeting.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.9 (Tibetan BrdaRten proposal):
Unanimous
WG2 notes the proposal for 956 BrdaRten Tibetan characters in document N2558, and invites all national
bodies to review and provide feedback to the authors, and invites the Chinese national body to submit arevised proposal incorporating the feedback, prior to the next WG2 meeting.

7.17 Additional Cyrillic characters for Siberian Yupik
Input document:
2560
Proposal for Encoding Additional Cyrillic Characters for Siberian Yupik; SIL International (contacts: Jim
Brase, Peter Constable); 2002-12-06

Mr. Michael Everson: Document N2560 is a proposal from Messrs. Peter Constable and Jim Brase as anexpert contribution. Two characters capital and small Ghe with descender are proposed. It is used in
Siberian Yupik language in Russia and Alaska, also on Sakahlin Island for Nivkh language. There are
two glyphs – the descenders have two different shapes. The two should be unified and only one of theseshapes should be kept – with more traditional shape for the descender than the curved form. Glyph,name and code position is suggested.
Discussion:a. Dr. Ken Whistler: There are differences in Ka with descender in two different forms as well. These
characters are used in neighbouring area languages. Some implementation guidelines could be
added for what to do with Ka with descender also. Which of the two Ka with descender should be
used for Siberian Cyrillic?
b. Mr. Klaas Ruppel: There are also N with descenders in them.
c. Mr. Michael Everson: We will need to add these as well to the implementation guidelines in Unicode.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 29 of 51
2003-08-26

Action item: The authors are to revise the proposal, referring also the usage preferences for the
additional N and Ka with descenders. All national bodies are to review and feedback.

8 10646-2
8.1

Disposition of Comments on ballot results FPDAM 1

Input documents:
2521
Summary of Voting/Table of Replies – 10646-2 Amendment 1; SC2 Secretariat; 2002-11-152542
Proposed disposition of comments – 10646-2 Amendment 1; Suignard; 2002-12-03
2563
Proposed disposition of comments - 10646-2 Amendment 1; Suignard; 2002-12-11
Output document:
2570R
Disposition of comments on SC2 3625 (FPDAM text to Amendment 1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2; Suignard; 2002-1212

Document N2521 contains the table of replies. Of the 35 member bodies of SC2, 13 had approved (USA
had comments), 1 disapproved (Ireland), 4 abstained and 17 had not voted. Mr. Michel Suignard
presented the proposed disposition of comments in document N2542. The final disposition of comments
submitted to SC2 secretariat can be found in document N2570R.
Ireland: Disapproval
T.1 (also by US) accepted – Correcting Tai Xuang Jing to Tai Xuan Jing throughout.
T.2 (also by US) accepted – Add missing Collection number and Block name for Tai Xuan Jing.
Mr. Michael Everson: Ireland reverses its disapproval.
USA: Approval with comments
T.1 a (same as T.1 of Ireland) and b (same as Ireland T.2); both accepted.
T.2 replace 10D4C1 with 1D4C1 in code tables and list of character names – accepted.
T.3 Annex E
Mr. Michel Suignard: US proposes to add text regarding Mirrored Characters. It affects the Part 2 Old
Italic characters only. It does not affect any other scripts in Part 1 and Part 2.
Accepted.
Editorial Comments: Both accepted.
Disposition: Amendment progresses to next stage. Editor to prepare final disposition of comments,
prepare text for FDAM, and submit to SC2 secretariat.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.7 (Progression of Amendment 1 to 10646-2):
Unanimous
WG2 instructs its project editor to prepare the text for FDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2 based on thedisposition of comments, which is mostly correction of errors, in document N2542, and include thedecision in resolution M43.6 above. WG2 further instructs its editor to submit the disposition of comments
and the FDAM-1 text to the SC2 secretariat for FDAM ballot, with the unchanged completion target dateof 2003-04.

8.2

Addition of 2 Hanja character references to 10646-2

Input document:
2518
Proposal to add 2 Hanja char in 10646-2; Committee for Standardization (CSK) – DPR Korea; 2002-11-01

This document was discussed along with document N2517 containing a similar request for Part 1. See
item 7.8 on page 24 for the discussion and the relevant resolution M43.10.

8.3

Kharoshthi script

Input document:
2524
Proposal to Encode Kharoshthi in Plane 1 of ISO/IEC 10646; Andrew Glass, Stefan Baums, Richard Salomon– via Unicode; 2002-11-20

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 30 of 51
2003-08-26

Dr. Ken Whistler: Document N2524 is a first time proposal of an ancient Right to Left script used in India.
The document gives a history of the script, elements of the script, how the combinations of characters are
done. Code charts are proposed. There are a few questions in the US review - on the use of some of
the combinations. The proposal is fairly mature. Typographical usage is known. We are asking fornational body feedback on the document for consideration for inclusion in the standard at the next
meeting. It is proposed for SMP for use by scholars and academicians. A block of characters starting at
10A00 is proposed, as indicated in the Roadmap.
Discussion:a. Mr. Mike Ksar: How many characters? Is it similar to existing Indic scripts? Do the proposers
understand the use of combining sequences?
b. Dr. Ken Whistler: Lots of examples are given in the document. It is like other Indic scripts for
combining sequences, but less complicated.
c. Mr. Michael Everson: This is in the RTL left block in the roadmap. The Kharoshthi virama does nothave a visible form ever, unlike the Indic viramas. It is more like a control. The current presentation
was to facilitate comparison with other Indic scripts. But the properties of these characters aredifferent - they are strong RTL. The blank spots can be removed and the table shortened.
d. Dr. Ken Whistler: There is also a double-ring combining mark character to be used only inTransliteration with Latin script.
e. Dr. Asmus Freytag: UTC has accepted the Kharoshthi double ring below for inclusion in post V4.0(?).. The necessary documentation has not been submitted to WG2.
Disposition: All national bodies to review and feedback; a revised proposal will be for consideration andacceptance at the next meeting.

8.4

Manichaean script

Input document:
2544
Revised proposal to encode the Manichaean script in the UCS; Everson; 2002-12-03

Mr. Michael Everson: I met with a number of specialists on Indo-Iranian languages in Prague last week.
Some of the scripts needed by these languages have been proposed in the past. The title of thisdocument N2544 should not be a ‘revised proposal’. This document is the first proposal on Manichaean.
It is derived from Syriac script, estrangelo form. We had a discussion on whether it can be unified with
Syriac. There are some initial forms and final forms; the final form has an extra swash on it. It is not ascomplex as Arabic. It is an RTL script. There are some characters that are completely strange to Syriac.
Syriac implementations are already in progress, and they will not know what to do with these characters.
There was a strong consensus on having this as a separate script in the SMP. There are three similar
looking combining doubledots above. The first of these at 2A is like the single dot. The 2B isabbreviation one and 2C is for plural form. There will be a revised proposal containing additional
background information, additional examples of use etc. The script is used in the Manichaean religion
etc.
Discussion:a. Dr. Umamaheswaran: Can the glyphs for the three similar characters be different than shown?
b. Mr. Michael Everson: Possibly.
Action item: All national bodies to review and feedback, for consideration at the next meeting.

8.5

Old Persian script – revised proposal

Input document:
2545
Revised proposal to encode the Old Persian script in the UCS; Everson; 2002-12-03

Mr. Michael Everson: Submitted earlier proposal in document N1639 dated 1997. Old Persian script was
key to decipherment of Sumero-Akkadian Cuneiform. C8 and C9 have identical names (one with a –2),
one could consider these as glyph variants of each other. There was some discussion on thesecharacters; there was no value in separating these in the glyph and having some selector between these
two—so the decision was to leave them as individual ideographs. C8—CF are ideographs. 40
characters are proposed.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 31 of 51
2003-08-26

Discussion:a. Dr. Ken Whistler: I would like some more information for the numbers and word dividers. I would liketo see some sort of endorsement from the experts with whom you have been discussing attached to
the revised proposal. The property Lo is fine for those that are letters. However, not all of these areletters.
b. Mr. Mike Ksar: Need some information on use of numbers. How one would write missing amounts?
c. Mr. Michael Everson: There are high fidelity examples / photo shots?
Action item: Mr. Michael Everson to revise the proposal. All national bodies are to review and feedback.

8.6

Ancient Greek Musical Symbols

Input document:
2547
Proposal to encode Ancient Greek Musical Symbols in the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae Graecae Project(University of California, Irvine); 2002-11-07

Dr. Ken Whistler: Document N2547 is another proposal from US reflecting input from TLG related toancient Greek. Unlike the Metrical symbols, this set of symbols is used in Musical notation in ancient
Greek. It is different from the Byzantine musical symbols. The entire set takes 5 columns 1D200—
1D24F. These are obviously derived form Greek letters, but are turned etc. for vocal and instrumental
notation. There are combining marks and a special combined with others. This document reflects theextensive feedback to the authors from the US and UTC to TLG. This document is pretty close to thefinal proposal for SMP. Requesting national body feedback and for consideration at the next meeting forinclusion.
Discussion:a. Mr. Mike Ksar: Did any one contact Mr. Melagrakis from Greece. I would suggest the document besent to him. It would be of potential interest to other experts in Greece.
b. Mr. Michael Everson: The name of the characters in other blocks is slightly different from the othersimilar block names like Byzantine etc. It has to be reflected in the roadmap.
c. Dr. Ken Whistler: I believe the name reflects the name familiar to the users of this notation.
Action item: All national bodies to review and feedback. Mr. Michael Everson is to update the roadmap
document.

8.7

Saurashtra script

Input document:
2549
Proposal to encode the Saurashtra script in the UCS; Jeyakumar Chinnakkonda Krishnamoorty and MichaelEverson; 2002-12-03

Mr. Michael Everson: Saurashtra is a language used by a community in Tamil Nadu in India. They haveused many other scripts in the past and more recently Tamil as well. The script is roadmapped in the
BMP. The expert feels that its use is marginal now, and if we code in the SMP it may not be severe. It
will be good idea to move this to SMP. Earlier versions of Saurashtra used conjuncts. They have
simplified the script more like Malayalam. It is similar to other Indic scripts, with less complex conjunctbehaviour. No reordering of vowel marks. Need to know what to do with second H sound character.
Feedback at the meeting:Character properties have to be spelled out. Consultation with INFITT group also could help.
Check out also Tamil SA, page 7, left side, right most on 2nd row from end.
Action item: All national bodies to review and feedback. Mr. Michael Everson is to get feedback andupdate the roadmap.

8.8

Avestan and Pahlavi script – revised proposal

Input document:
2556
Revised proposal to encode the Avestan and Pahlavi script in the UCS; Michael Everson; 2002-12-04

Mr. Michael Everson: Avestan arose as a script reform of Pahlavi. Pahlavi was derived from Aramaic.
The script is RTL. No shaping is involved, much like Hebrew, but connected like Arabic. The numbers
are written using letters. The set includes several characters that are different in names but look alike.
There are also three archeographemes which are parts of characters in writing. There is an effort in
capturing much of the material corpuses on line. I have discussed much of these with the experts. They
do have a way of dealing with ambiguities. There are dictionaries on Avestan etc.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 32 of 51
2003-08-26

Discussion:a. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader: Characters with similar shapes are of concern to me. There may bepossible unifications of some of these after consulting with the experts. There are Zoroastrian
communities in Iran who may be using these and I would like to get feedback from them. I havegiven a book on the topic to Mr. Michael Everson. Unicode properties and information on numberingsystem are to be added.
b. Dr. Ken Whistler: I have concern with the term Archegrapheme. The Avastan part seems to be
decent in here. I am concerned with the Pahlavi. It seems to be an attempt to do character encoding
for something it is not meant for. It looks like an attempt to get into the structure of the script, rather
than representation of the characters themselves. It looks like putting invisible diacritics on thecharacters. The three glyph pieces are like the Strokes in Han.
c. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader: It is like writing a ‘C’ in Latin and pronouncing it differently in different
contexts.
d. Mr. Michael Everson: We know how to transliterate if we know the distinction between the different
GA, DA etc. which look alike. Meaningful searches are not easy if we do not distinguish these incharacter code.
Action item: All national bodies are to review and feedback. There will be a revised proposal
incorporating some feedback from the experts of users.

8.9

Errors in CJK Compatibility characters’ source reference maps

Input document:
2563
CJK Compatibility ideographs, Proposed Technical Corrigendum; Project Editor Input to ISO/IEC 106462:2001 FPDAM1; Suignard; 2002-12-11

Mr. Michel Suignard: There are seven entries marked from CJKC_SR.txt in FPDAM-1 for Part 2, which
are in error. The entire file was created by manually editing the file. The seven errors came in during theprocess. Four of the five were mapping errors in the original data. There were two inaccuracies in thesource information. The corrections are indicated in document N2563. I propose that we accept thiscorrigendum.
Discussion:a. Dr. Asmus Freytag: Similar to the font policy, when contributions coming on ideographs without thecorrect source references, mappings etc. supplied to the editor, these should not be included in thestandard. Otherwise we do get into situation such as we have. The editor should have the right topull the characters if the necessary information is not provided to the editor.
b. Mr. Mike Ksar: Errors such as these, and the corrigenda that arise due to these errors, throws somecredibility question on the work we do on the standard. We should avoid acting in a hurry and incurerrors such as in this case.
c. Mr. Michel Suignard: Does the IRG editor intend to provide a newer updated version of the source
reference file?
d. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: The IRG intends to do the CJK Unified Source Reference file. The Compatibility
mapping will be maintained by the editor. We intend to compare the amendment file with the IRG
super CJK database. We will synchronize these.
e. Mr. Michel Suignard: Without doing much research we found two errors.
Disposition: Accept the corrigendum in N2563 and process it as part of Amendment 1 to Part 2.
Action item: Principles and Procedures to include requirement for Source References and Mapping
information for ideographs in machine readable form be sent to the editor. IRG editor to ensure thesource reference file in the amendment is in synch with the Super CJK database.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.6 (Editor’s input to Part 2 on CJK Compatibility Ideograph mappings):
Unanimous
WG2 accepts the technical corrections to CJK Compatibility Source References listed in document N2563
and instructs its editor to include these corrections in FDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 33 of 51
2003-08-26

9 Architecture issues
9.1

Merged 10646 parts 1 & 2

Input documents:
2499R
Merged part 1 and part 2; Michel Suignard; 2002-07-31
2527
Canadian Comments on merging 10646-1&-2; NB of Canada; 2002-11-25
2528
Netherlands comments on merging 10646-1&-2; NB Netherlands; 2002-11-25
2529
Republic of Korea comments on merging 10646-1&-2; NB Republic of Korea; 2002-11-25

Mr. Michel Suignard: You still have the opportunity to input suggestions etc to the editor. The merged
document should not have technical changes from the existing standards and their accepted
amendments. Any changes can be only editorial. Input was received from Korea, Netherlands andCanada through SC2 and the US input was reflected in N2499R. If there are any technical changes weneed to adopt them as part of the current amendments in progress.
Mr. Mike Ksar: The new merged part will include all the amendment changes we agreed to at thismeeting.
Document N2529 – Comments from Republic of Korea
Mr. Michel Suignard: The first comment from RoK is to name the tables that span more than one
page differently.
Discussion:a. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The request cannot be accommodated with the current tools we have to
produce the charts. We have the entire CJK set of tables numbered as one table.
b. Mr. Michel Suignard: The table numbering is not normative part of the standard. I suggest we
leave it alone.
c. Professor Kyongsok Kim: The first edition - 1993 version - did number the tables OK. When we
number a table as Table 100 and we cannot find that table, we will have a problem. If people
know that there are multiple tables with the same table number they will be cautious. The usual
editing assumption is that when a table spans across pages, the numbering is expected to bedifferent. The table numbering change between the first edition to the next one was not noticed
earlier.
d. Mr. Mike Ksar: The tool that we used for the first edition is not used any more. ITTF does nothave a problem with the current table numbering in the standard. They do check the drafts
provided to them.
e. Dr. Ken Whistler: By accommodating this request, we will have to end up in changing the table
numbers not only for the Hangul script but for all the other scripts as well. We cannot fix only
Hangul tables and leave the others alone. Others are not complaining about their scripts.
f. Dr. Asmus Freytag: You admit that you did not notice the change in table numbering in yourreview between the two editions. It cannot be that important. The big difference between thecurrent and previous edition is that the newer editions are produced by automated tools rather
than hand editing each table that was done in the previous edition. The manual process allowed
some amount of flexibility in tailor making etc. The automated tool uses some conventions and isconsistent for all scripts.
g. Professor Kyongsok Kim: It is still a problem from the user point of view.
h. Mr. Mike Ksar: What you are asking to do will impact users of other scripts as well. Such achange will impact far more than the Hangul script.
Disposition: Not accepted.
Mr. Michel Suignard: The second comment from RoK is on the Fonts for 11A8 to 11F9. I depend on
people providing fonts and on the contributing editor. We do not have the source for the 1993 fonts.
Discussion:a. Dr. Asmus Freytag: If someone is able to provide a single and consistent font for the entire 1100
block then I can use it.
b. Professor Kyongsok Kim: If you give me the font that you are using then I can work on it, refine it
and supply it back to you.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 34 of 51
2003-08-26

c.

Dr. Umamaheswaran: If we accept that we do have a problem and we accept that the solution isdesired we can treat it as an editorial corrigendum.
d. Mr. Mike Ksar: The problem has been stated but the solution is not provided. The font has to besupplied as well.
e. Professor Kyongsok Kim: Is the process then to submit a defect a report?
f. Dr. Asmus Freytag: As a minimum we would like to see at least a printed version of the glyphs inquestion before we can review and accept it as a request. Also as a point of synchronization
between the Unicode and 10646, if this is a defect, the earlier we fix it the better it is.
g. Mr. Mike Ksar: We noted the input from Korea. If a defect report is raised during this meeting we
may be able to process it.
(As far as I know, no defect report was brought to the attention of the meeting by RoK – Recording
secretary.) *Document N2528- Comment from the Netherlands
Mr. Michel Suignard: Netherlands is concerned about the size of the standard. I believe that size ofprinting argument is not as much valid any more, because we are going to have everything on asingle CD. It is preferable to have both parts on a single medium – and page count is not an issue fora CD version. The amount of confusion maintaining two parts and their amendments andcoordination and synchronization with Unicode is more real than what Netherlands has commented
on.
Mr. Michael Everson: Comments from Netherlands does not accommodate any of the views of theusers of the standard.
Not accepted.
Document N2527 – Comments from Canada
Mr. Michel Suignard: I have made a draft of the document incorporating many of the comments
requested from Canada. Most of their comments have been accepted. However, I would like to bringsome to WG2’s attention.
• Item 1a - Group and Plane numbering consistency is accepted. Use of mixed Plane numbers
and plane names is kept where appropriate.
• Item 2-j – reference is to clause 28.2 (not to clause 27)• Item 2-aa – RoK sources – one of the source references is in decimal format – only for K4dddd source file.
Discussion:a. Dr. Umamaheswaran: If we accept this comment, it has to be provided to the editor for the next
amendment.
b. Mr. Michel Suignard: We need a decision at this meeting.
Disposition: Accepted; RoK will work with the Editor to get the necessary information into themerged part, as editorial change, since technically they are equivalent..
•

Mr. Michel Suignard: Item 2-jj – draw your attention to this -- better wording is suggested.
Accepted.
• Item 3 – is more than editorial. Points to some format characters notably 2060 WJ that are
missing from the standard. Accept in principle.
Action item: Messrs. Umamaheswaran, Michel Suignard and Asmus Freytag to create a Tech
Corrigendum document.
(Note: the above did not happened during the meeting - Umamaheswaran).
• Item 4 - Clause 11 - Identifies the source of maintenance of the standard.
Discussion:a. Mr. Mike Ksar: Is this part of the ITTF template? Is this something from ITTF on WG2 or
something we added?
b. Ms. Toshiko Kimura: It is not part of the ITTF template.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 35 of 51
2003-08-26

c.

Mr. Michael Everson: In ISO/IEC 2375 we had a similar clause - but reworded to in such a
way that it refers to the subcommittee charged with maintenance of the standard. JTC1 rules
do not have any rules prohibiting such a statement.
d. Mr. Mike Ksar: The question is if SC2 disappears what would happen? The current text has
been in the standard for a long time. Why this comment is being made now?
e. Dr. Ken Whistler: The US input is that this clause has not created any problem from animplementation for products.
f. Mr. Takayuki Sato: A future maintenance group will have the responsibility of changing it.
One group feels like changing the current text and others do not. Somehow this is related toAnnex P. Keeping such a clause in the standard will give an impression of stability.
g. Mr. Mike Ksar: My suggestion is to keep the current text.
Disposition: No changes to the current text.
Further processing:
Discussion:a. Mr. Michel Suignard: I need to accommodate the new text from all amendments into the revised text.
b. Mr. Takayuki Sato: The SC2 secretariat’s alternatives are -- to send out the merged text along withthe amendments, or, to send the merged document separately for a ballot.
c. Mr. Mike Ksar: There are no two alternatives – the merged text will be sent to ITTF after the
Amendments ballots are completed.
d. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: What would be the target date?
e. Mr. Mike Ksar: Possibly end of 2003.
Disposition: Editor will circulate a revised version reflecting the final texts of 10646-1: 2000, 10646-2:
2001, Amd. 1 to Part 1, Amd. 2 to Part 1, and Amd. 1 to Part 2.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.11 (Single part standard):
Abstention: Republic of Korea
Yes: Canada, China, Finland, Iran, Ireland, Japan, DPR of Korea, Singapore, USA

WG2 instructs its editor to prepare a Revised Text for the single-part ISO/IEC 10646: 2003, reflecting thefinal texts of FDAM-2 to 10646-1: 2000 and FDAM-1 to 10646-2: 2001 from this meeting, and all acceptedchanges arising out of the discussion on the feedback in documents N2527, N2528 and N2529 on theworking draft in document N2499R.
WG2 further instructs its editor to incorporate any additional changes arising out of FDAM ballots on theabove two amendments, and to forward the final text to ITTF for publishing, incorporating any editorialchanges needed to accommodate the feedback comments, to replace the current published parts of10646 and their accepted amendments until that date. The target date for submitting the final text to ITTF
is 2003-09.
M43.12 (IRG Support for Single part standard):
Unanimous
WG2 instructs the IRG to assist the project editor ina. reviewing the suitability of the font that has been used for Unicode V 3.1 for use inpreparing the CJK charts for Extension B ideographs,
b. preparing a new set of charts in PDF format for BMP CJK Unified ideographs
for finalization by 2003-05.

9.2

Roadmap documents

Input documents:
2515
Recommendation to earmark Plane 3 in the Roadmap; Ad-hoc committee on the Roadmap (Michael Everson,
Rick McGowan, Ken Whistler); 2002-11-11
2559
Snapshot of Pictorial view of Roadmaps to BMP, SMP, SIP and SSP; Uma; 2002-12-06

Mr. Michael Everson: N2515 is a contribution from the ad hoc committee on Roadmap. It is known that
ideographs in Extension C and beyond Extension C will overflow the SIP. Recognizing that we suggest
we roadmap Plane 3 for these ideographs, and call it Auxiliary Ideograph Plane (AIP), it is not to be

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 36 of 51
2003-08-26

construed as request to start working on defining the plane 3, nor should it be viewed as expecting
Extension C to overflow the SIP.
Discussion:a. Mr. Mike Ksar: One of my concerns is the usage of different names that are not in the standard. Notethat we are not reserving anything, it is just a roadmap.
b. Dr. Ken Whistler: For the purposes of the Roadmap it can be called a ‘Plane to be Named Later’. Let
us call it simply Plane 3, and not Auxiliary Ideograph Plane or AIP.
c. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: Roadmap is different from the code charts. It is not a reservation for anything. I
think the intent is important. What is currently in the roadmap marked as (..) or ???, can be moved
around. It is possible destination. Suggest name change from Auxiliary Ideograph Plane.
d. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The use of Plane 3 in the roadmap is to indicate that Plane 3 is preferred overother planes such as Plane 8.
Disposition: The name will be simply Plane 3. It will be incorporated into the next update of the
Roadmap document. Document N2559 is the snapshot of the roadmap as of December 06, 2002, and it
will be sent to SC2 for posting.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.13 (Roadmap snapshot):
Unanimous
WG2 accepts the snapshot of the latest roadmaps in document N2559 and requests SC2 to circulate it tonational bodies and liaison organizations for referencing as a guide for future submissions replacing theprevious snapshot document N2461.
M43.14 (Roadmap - Plane 3):
Abstention: IranYes: Canada, China, Finland, Ireland, Japan, DPR of Korea, Republic of Korea, Singapore, USA
WG2 accepts the recommendation in document N 2515 from the Roadmap ad hoc committee for adding
Plane 3 as an additional supplementary plane to the roadmap, identifying it as ‘Plane 3’.

9.3

Note on Soft Hyphen

Input documents:
2531
Note on soft hyphens in 10646/Unicode; Kent Karlsson; 2002-11-26
2557
Response to N2531 on SHY; Eric Muller; 2002-12-02

Dr. Asmus Freytag: The first part of the comment was to recognize that SHY is a format control character
instead of being a graphic character. The second point was that the TODO and MONGLIAN hyphens are
not of the same categories. The third part is related to the suggestion from Swedish expert about SHY.
Discussion:a. Mr. Michel Suignard: There is some controversy about the last sentence proposed by the US.
b. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The action of the SHY is to mark a possible line break. The rendering logic has
to take care of the appropriate rendering associated around the line break.
c. Mr. Michael Everson: What is the difference from 'insert a character B' in the text?
d. Dr. Asmus Freytag: SHY is being used as a control character and communities such as UNIX users
want to simply replace the character with a Hyphen. We are trying to provide some guidelines on its
proper use.
e. Mr. Roozbeh Pournader: What about the Mongolian Todo Hyphen etc.
f. Dr. Asmus Freytag: As to the Mongolian Todo Soft Hyphen etc. they work to indicate end of a line.
They probably should not have had the name 'SOFT' in them. Armenian hyphen seems to be similar.
These do not behave the same way as the Soft Hyphen as a control character.
g. Mr. Michel Suignard: Every one is encouraged to read the two contributions under in documents
N2531 and N2557.
h. Dr. Asmus Freytag: Be aware that there is yet another proposal from Mr. Kent Karlsson with Double
Hyphen etc. The suggestion to him was that it is outside the scope of the standard.
Disposition: Accept in principle. Informative note is being proposed – editor is to finalize the wording.
As a result of the discussion, the GLYPH for 'Mongolian Todo Soft Hyphen' has to change.
(The character did not go into the format characters list, therefore does not have to be removed.)
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 37 of 51
2003-08-26

See relevant resolution M43.4 at the end of agenda item 7.1 on page 14.

9.4

Constraints on character names for loose matching

Input document:
2536
Constraints on Character Names for Loose Matching; US National Body – Mark Davis; 2002-11-24

Ms. Cathy Wissink: This is a request for having some constraints on future character names in thestandard to facilitate loose string matching. There are examples shown where loose matching fails due tocurrent names in the standard. The document shows the three steps associated with the matching using
the character names and properties of characters in the Unicode database.
Discussion:a. Mr. Michel Suignard: Is the intent to include some criterion in Annex L? Someone has to provide thenecessary text.
b. Dr. Asmus Freytag: We should not make any statements about translated names. We should restrict
all statements to only the English names.
c. Dr. Umamaheswaran: The best way to deal with it is to create the proposed sentence to add toAnnex L, include it as a proposed addition to Amendment 2 to Part 1.
d. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: Is your intent to change the names of the three exceptions characters? No.
e. Dr. Asmus Freytag: The idea is never to change the existing names. The exceptions are notedalready. This enhancement is to enable loose matching so that future character names will not be
exceptions. It does not apply to all the names that are already accepted.
f. Mr. Michel Suignard: It will be useful to add ‘notes’ to existing names which may be the exceptions to
the rule.
g. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: I would like to have some more time to think about the implications of this
proposal. Are spaces to be ignored?
h. Dr. Ken Whistler: I will read proposed text for adding to Annex L:
i. “Rule 14 – names are unique if spaces and hyphens are ignored, and, if the strings LETTER,
CHARACTER and DIGIT are ignored in comparison of names. Examples are KHAROSHTI LETTER
AA and KHAROSHTI CHARACTER AA will not be unique. Known exceptions to the rule are: …”
j. Dr. Asmus Freytag: We believe that we are not losing flexibility by disallowing uniqueness by ignoring
SPACEs and HYPHENs. We have compared all the characters in the list of names in the standard,
and the only known exceptions are in the document.
k. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: I understand you have done the analysis. I would like to study this proposal.
l. Mr. Michael Everson: In the creation of new names, it is easy for me to follow the rules.
m. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: I need some more time to study. I need to understand what the term ‘loose
matching’ means.
n. Mr. James Seng: I have concern about removing the string DIGIT. CHARACTER and LETTER I canunderstand. The DIGIT ONE versus LETTER ONE needs clarification. What about LIGATURE?
o. Dr. Ken Whistler: We had a proposal for SAURASHTRA DIGIT ONE. If both are ONES and one wasa digit versus a non-digit. The new rule will make the name have some additional part in the name sothat DIGIT and LETTER alone will not make them unique names.
p. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: The character names are used as part of ISO/IEC 2375. We should passthis proposal to WG3 also.
q. Dr. Asmus Freytag: We are NOT proposing to change of any of the existing character names. It isonly for future names of characters. The names have to be unique, but we are making them uniquefor loose matching also. They will be more distinguishable. It also helps in improving the quality ofnames for human interpretation. I understand your need to understand the proposal – the proposal iswritten in an algorithmic way.
r. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: The character names are also used for names in 2375. It may be out of thescope of WG2 alone. They accept new concepts if some one proposes new characters.
s. Mr. Mike Ksar: WG2 and WG3 also follow the same rules for character names. The proposal is not tochange any of the existing names. WG3 does not have any program of work in place involving newnames.
t. Dr. Umamaheswaran: Since the naming convention is used and referenced by other standards andother syntaxes etc. we should alert the larger community.
u. Mr. Michael Everson: Let us say LATIN DIGIT ONE, we don’t want to have LATIN LETTER ONE etc.
we can add LATIN LETTER MEXICAN ONE etc.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 38 of 51
2003-08-26

v.

Mr. Mike Ksar: there are not many LIGATUREs. Annex L is informative. The preference is to include
it as a part of the amendment 2 of part 1.
w. Mr. Michel Suignard: As the editor I need some flexibility to incorporate at a more appropriate place inAnnex L.
Disposition: Accept the proposal – draft a new rule for Annex L to be included in Amendment 2 to Part 1.
The text for the new rule was spelled out during the meeting and is captured in the relevant resolution
below.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.2 (Character name rule for Loose Matching):
No: DPR of Korea
Abstention: Japan
Yes: Canada, China, Finland, Iran, Ireland, Republic of Korea, Singapore, USA
With reference to proposal for additional constraints on character names in document N2536, WG2
resolves to add the following new rule to Annex L on English character names in the standard, in order toenhance the uniqueness of character names::
Names are unique if SPACEs and HYPHENs are ignored, and if the strings “LETTER”,“CHARACTER”, and “DIGIT” are ignored in comparison of the names.
Examples of unacceptable unique names:
KHAROSHTI LETTER AA
KHAROSHTI CHARACTER AA
These two names would not be unique if the strings “LETTER” and “CHARACTER” are ignored.
The following six character names will remain as exceptions to this rule, since alreadystandardized character names will not be changed:
0F68 TIBETAN LETTER A
0FB8 TIBETAN SUBJOINED LETTER A
116C HANGUL JUNGSEONG OE

0F60 TIBETAN LETTER –A
0FB0 TIBETAN SUBJOINED LETTER –A
1180 HANGUL JUNGSEONG O-E

WG2 further instructs its editor to merge the above rule to the existing text of informative Annex L, withany needed editorial changes, and add it to the text for FDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.

9.5

CJK Compatibility characters – clarification request

Input document:
2530
Clarification to Resolution M42.13 on Hanja Compatibility; NB Singapore – James Seng; 2002-11-26

This document was not discussed at the meeting. Postponed to next meeting.

10 Publication issues
None for this meeting.

11 IRG status and reports
11.1 IRG Resolutions)
Input document:
2532
IRG Meeting 20 Resolutions; IRG; 2002-11-21
2571
Ancient Ideographs Encoding – Working Procedure; Zhang, IRG Rapporteur; 2002-12-11

Mr. Zhang Zhoucai presented document N2532, containing IRG M20 resolutions.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 39 of 51
2003-08-26

M20.1 - Future meetings: The next meeting is IRG 21 in Beijing, 2003-04-7—11. Meeting IRG 22 – TCA
was first host, Unicode was asked to hold Meeting 22 in October 2003, before the WG2 October 2003
meeting.
M20.2 - IRG came up with a unanimous resolution on the Basic Subset of CJK. The result is in document
N2539 under item 11.3. DPRK also confirmed their acceptance. If WG2 accepts this document, IRG willcontinue to collect the feedback / submissions from the IRG members to create the Basic Subset. This isin response to the Dublin WG2 discussion.
M20.3 - Re: Clarification of Unification Rules, we did not modify the rules in Annex S - only someclarification. The summary is to be found in document N2526, supported by all IRG members
unanimously.
M20.4 – document N2534 contains the IRG Radical Classification.
M20.9 - Document N2533 is an IRG standing document; contains guidelines for First Stroke and StrokeCount. This document is for use by IRG editors.
Administrative:
M20.6 – Mr. Zhang Zhoucai is nominated by IRG as the rapporteur for the next term.
M20.7 - IRG Chief editor and technical editor -- Mr. Chen Zhuang and Ms. Wang Xiaoming have been
nominated for the same term as the Rapporteur.
M20.5 – each member body should have a chief editor who is responsible for the quality of the input fromthe member body and they must be familiar with the IRG rules and regulations. The request for
nomination is December 12, 2002. RoK and Macau have responded. The chief editor from RoK for
example had a meeting and decided to withdraw a number of ideographs from Extension C due to quality
problems.
IRG encourages the members to provide explanatory notes for Annex S, for use in IRG. It is needed
especially for new IRG members to understand how IRG work is done.
Mr. Mike Ksar: I would like to appreciate the work done by IRG convener, editors and the members in
helping WG2 to identify, consolidate and refine the CJK repertoires that are under consideration.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.16 (IRG – Member’s Chief Editors for CJK Ext. C):
Unanimous
WG2 endorses the IRG resolution M20.5 regarding appointment of a Chief Editor from each of the IRG
member bodies, towards ensuring the quality of input to the work on CJK Extension C and all othercontributions to the IRG.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.17 (IRG Officers):
Unanimous
WG2 endorses the IRG nomination of Mr. Zhang Zhoucai as IRG Rapporteur for the next term.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.19 (Appreciation to IRG):
By Acclamation
WG 2 thanks the IRG members, its Rapporteur and its editors, for their work in assisting WG2 byidentifying, refining and consolidating the CJK repertoires that are under consideration.

11.2 Request for clarifications – CJK Strokes
Input document:
2526
CJK Stroke Clarification; NB Singapore – James Seng; 2002-11-24

Mr. James Seng: Singapore realized that some strokes or components of ideographs are being proposed
for Extension C. Some strokes already in Extension A and B could be considered as standalone
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 40 of 51
2003-08-26

ideographs. More strokes are being proposed for inclusion in Extension C, but there is some confusion
as to whether they can or cannot be entertained in Extension C. In the CJK Han block, there was no
specification as to whether Stokes can or cannot be included in the unified CJK. IRG is unable to arrive
at a consensus on this question.
Discussion:a. Dr. Ken Whistler: What WG2 has delegated to IRG is to determine the repertoire of Ideographs. The
question being raised is whether the CJK strokes should be treated as SYMBOLs or should betreated also as Ideographs and passed back to IRG.
b. Mr. Michael Everson: The strokes themselves are used as introductory texts in dictionaries etc. andcould be quite useful. I would be open to include them even in the BMP. It is apart from the massive
number of ideographs. It does not matter whether IRG does the work or not. It should be treated asa separate set of characters apart form the Unified CJK ideographs.
c. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: IRG has not arrived at a consensus. However, it does not mean that they
have stopped discussion. There are varied opinions. Some believe that a stroke is only a character,others believe that it could be an ideograph in addition to being a stroke. My understanding is that
IRG wants to have some discussion about this issue. I think we should wait for further input from theIRG.
d. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: There are two issues – first, should the strokes be added to the ideographrepertoire; the second, is it possible to pick characters from different blocks and collect them as
ideographic strokes. Most of these are already in CJK unified ideographs, in CJK Radicals, and inother blocks. Should we collect them into and identify them as a separate block.
e. Mr. Michael Everson: Is your question that we should encode the missing ones?
f. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: Most of them are already encoded in the 1st edition, in Extension A.
g. Mr. Mike Ksar: Your question is should we continue this in the IRG or should we do it in an ad hoc in
WG2. If IRG has reached an impasse then WG2 will deal with it.
h. Mr. James Seng: I disagree that it is still under discussion in IRG. There are about 16 strokes now.
i. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: The key is that if WG2 has no possibility of opening a new block for thesestrokes, then that will be an end.
j. Mr. Michael Everson: Can we put into the roadmap – for example – an area where the ideographic
strokes can be targeted for. There is space in the BMP.
k. Mr. James Seng: That would satisfy my concern. My main concern is that these strokes should beencoded in a separate block.
l. Dr. Umamaheswaran: The IRG had always the option of identifying the set of ideographs into subsets
requesting them to be coded separately by WG2.
m. Dr. Ken Whistler: It seems to be straightforward to me that IRG to separate these strokes into aseparate subset from the large ideograph set and ask WG2 to treat them separately. There isprecedence to this with the Radicals that were brought forward. These are strokes and should be
separated out rather than being buried into the ideograph set.
n. Mr. Mike Ksar: I would like to leave the discussions in the IRG for a consensus.
o. Mr. Masahiro Sekiguchi: It is sometimes difficult to distinguish a stroke from an ideograph. I would
like to see an instruction from WG2 to IRG to study the possibility to separate the stroke from theideograph.
p. Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: IRG has been freezing the repertoire at different levels - the unification rules, theradicals, the stroke count, the subsets and then the strokes etc. at different levels. The strokes
themselves are at the lowest level of priority.
q. Mr. James Seng: I can understand that it is not the highest priority in the IRG. I do agree withJapan’s observation that it is difficult to separate a stroke from an ideograph. Without a clear
instruction from WG2 it would be difficult for me to convince them to put these into a separate blockfrom the others.
Disposition: Mr. Mike Ksar - IRG has to separate the candidates for treating characters as strokes
versus ideographs. The roadmap can give some guidelines. The priority has to be determined by IRG.
Action item: IRG to take note.

11.3 Create an Ideographic subset within 10646
Input document:
2539
Report to WG2 on Creating an Ideographic Subset within ISO/IEC 10646
IRG; 2002-11-19
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 41 of 51
2003-08-26

Relevant resolution(s):M43.15 (Basic international CJK sub-set):
Unanimous
WG2 accepts the IRG input in document N2539 (IRG N947) and encourages the IRG to collect additional
input and arrive at recommendations for a Basic international Ideograph Subset and submit for review at
the next WG2 meeting.

11.4 IRG Report to SC2 Plenary and to WG2Input document:
2538
IRG Report to SC2 plenary and to SC2/WG2; Zhang; 2002-11-27

Document N2538 is for information to WG2.

11.5 Ideographic Unification
Input document:
2535
Ideograph Unification; IRG; 2002-11-21

Document N2535 is for information to WG2.

11.6 IRG Radical Classification
Input document:
2534
IRG Radical Classification; IRG; 2002-11-21

Document N2534 is for information to WG2.

11.7 Report on first stroke/stroke countInput documents:
2533
Report on first stroke/stroke count by ad hoc group; IRG; 2002-11-21
2533A
Attachment to N2533 – StrokeC FirstS; IRG; 2002-11-21

Document N2533 and N2533A are for information to WG2.

11.8 Ancient Ideographs
Input document:
2571
Ancient Ideographs Encoding – Working Procedure; Zhang, IRG Rapporteur; 2002-12-11

Mr. Zhang Zhoucai: Regarding Document N2571 – Ancient ideographs, I have been asked forancient ideographs in IRG. Should this kind of submission go to WG2 directly or be dealt with IRG.
Document N2571 gives some background information.
Mr. Mike Ksar: IRG can certainly discuss the issues. If IRG cannot come to some kind of consensus
or recommendation to WG2, then bring it up to WG2 to handle it.

12 Defect reports
None at this meeting.

13 Liaison reports
13.1 Unicode Consortium
Input document:
2516
Unicode Liaison Report; Unicode; Pending

Dr. Asmus Freytag: The main thing I am going to report is the Unicode V4.0 publication schedule.
The members have just reviewed the introduction and core normative chapters. It will be published
as a book targeted sometime Sept / Oct 2003. It will be synchronized with up to Amd 2 of part 1 andAmd 1 of part 2—or the merged new version. The Alpha version of the database is just out. Someparts of the standard will be only online. The Unicode web site has additional information.
Internationalization and Unicode Conference (IUC) March 2003 is slated for Prague. Details about
the IUC are on the Unicode web site.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 42 of 51
2003-08-26

Mr. Mike Ksar: If anyone wants to be on the review list for Unicode you can send in a request to be
added to the distribution list.
Note: Document N2516 was yet to be submitted to the convener.

13.2 TC46
Input document:
2498
Report on the discussion of TC46 character additions; Randy Barry and Michael Everson; 2002-07-10

13.3 IETF
13.4 TC304
13.5 W3C

14 Other business14.1 Web Site Review
No discussion.
Relevant resolution(s):M43.20 (Appreciation to DKUUG for web services):
By Acclamation
WG 2 thanks DKUUG, in particular Mr. Keld Simonsen, for its continued support of the web site for WG 2
document distribution and the e-mail server.

14.2 Future Meetings
Relevant resolution(s):M43.18 (Future Meetings):
No: Iran
Yes: Canada, China, Finland, Ireland, Japan, DPR of Korea, Republic of Korea, Singapore, USA
WG 2 meetings:
Meeting 44 -- 2003-10-20/23, San Francisco Bay area, USA
Meeting 45 -- 2004-06 (tentative), Europe (waiting for a host); backup is USA
Meeting 46 – 2005-xx (tentative), Asia
IRG meetings:
IRG 21 - China 2003-04-07/11
IRG 22 – October 2003 – prior to WG2 meeting 44; Place to be determined,
IRG 23 – Taipei (tentative) and Unicode Consortium will be backup, in 2004.
IRG 24 – Republic of Korea, 2004

15 Closing
15.1 Approval of Resolutions of Meeting 43
Experts from Canada, China, Finland, Iran, Ireland, Japan, Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
Republic of Korea, Singapore, the Unicode Consortium (liaison) and the USA were present when thefollowing resolutions were adopted.
Draft resolutions in document N2554-Draft prepared by Dr. V.S. Umamaheswaran was reviewed.
The convener went through each one of them and the approvals, objections and abstentions wererecorded. The final resolutions can be found document N2554.
Resolution M43.2 - Spelling of KHAROSHTI was questioned.
Compatibility Hanja characters: Added reference to N2540 - N2540 contains the corrections of thecharts in the FPDAM text.
Japan – would like to see these kept in the Amendment. Objected to the resolution.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 43 of 51
2003-08-26

Professor Kyongsok Kim: I thought we decided not to add references etc. Was left to the editor tocome back and say yes or no – he said YES.
DPRK: what was the change re: collection 110 – fixing the error.
A new resolution 11-a was added to instruct the IRG with the font verification and preparation ofcharts for Single Part edition.
Mr. Takayuki Sato wanted this work to be noted with highest priority.
Date was changed to May 2003 for synchronizing with Unicode V4 publication.
Iran abstained on the name for Plane 3 for Roadmap.
WG2 meetings: Iran objects to holding any WG2 meeting in the USA for Iranian citizens and also tosome other countries. US is also concerned about the time period between Meetings 44 and 45.
Appreciation to the host:Relevant resolution(s):M43.21 (Appreciation):
By Acclamation
WG 2 thanks its host JISC IPSJ / ITSCJ and its staff Ms. Toshiko Kimura, Mr. Junsuke Miyazaki, and Mrs.
Mariko Takeuchi, for hosting and providing the excellent meeting facilities and administrative support.
WG2 also appreciates the kind hospitality extended by ITSCJ and members of the Japanese national
committee.

15.2 Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 11:55h on 2002-12-12.

16 Action Items
All action items recorded in the minutes of the following previous meetings have been either completed or dropped.
New action items from this meeting and outstanding action items from previous meetings are listed in the tables that
follow.
a. meeting 25, 1994-04-18/22, Antalya, Turkey (document N1033)
b. meeting 26, 1994-10-10/14,San Francisco, CA, USA (document N1117)
c. meeting 27, 1995-04-03/07, Geneva, Switzerland (document N1203)
d. meeting 28, 1995-06-22/26, Helsinki, Finland (document N 1253)
e. meeting 29, 1995-11-06/10, Tokyo, Japan (document N1303)
f. meeting 30, 1996-04-22/26, Copenhagen, Denmark (document N1353)
g. meeting 31, 1996-08-12/16, Québec City, Canada (document N1453)
h. meeting 32, 1997-01-20/24, Singapore (document N1503)
i. meeting 33, 1997-06-30/07-04, Heraklion, Crete, Greece (document N1603)
j. meeting 34, 1998-03-16/20, Redmond, WA, USA (document N1703)
k. meeting 35, 1998-09-21/25, London, UK (document N1903)
l. meeting 36, 1999-03-09/15, Fukuoka, Japan (document N2003)
m. meeting 37, 1999-09-17/21, Copenhagen, Denmark (document N2103)
n. meeting 38, 2000-07-18/21, Beijing, China (document N2203)
o. meeting 39, 2000-10-08/11, Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece (document N2353) andp. meeting 40, 2001-04-02/05, Mountain View, CA, USA (document N2403)

16.1 Outstanding action items from meeting 41, 2001-10-15/18, Singapore
Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2404R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2403 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 41)
AI-41-5 Ad hoc group on principles and procedures (lead - Dr. V.S.
UMAmaheswaran)a To check for any suitable enhancement needed regarding resolution M41.13(Policy regarding fonts for submissions to 10646).
M42 and M43 - In progress.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusIn progress.

Page 44 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2404R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2403 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 41)
c To address how to reference ISO/IEC 10646 in other publications and include
in principles and procedures document.
M42 and M43 - In progress.
d To look at the Principles and Procedures document and see if the guidelines
have to be enhanced re: glyph related guidelines / defect reports etc. basedon document N2382 (along with Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi, Japan).
M42 and M43 - In progress.
AI-41-6 IRG Rapporteur (Mr. Zhang Zhoucai)c To examine the guidelines document N2382 (from Japan - Mr. Tatsuo
Kobayashi) and provide feedback to WG 2.
M42 and M43 - In progress.
AI-41-12 Japanese national body (Mr. Takayuki Sato, Mr. Tatsuo Kobayashi)a Is invited to look at the Principles and Procedures document and see if theguidelines have to be enhanced re: glyph related guidelines / defect reports
etc. based on document N2382 (along with Dr. Umamaheswaran).
M42 and M43 - In progress.

StatusIn progress.

In progress.

In progress.

In progress.

16.2 Outstanding action items from meeting 42, 2002-05-20/23, Dublin, Ireland
Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2454R, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2453 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 42)
AI-42-5 Ad hoc group on principles and procedures (lead - Dr. V.S.
UMAmaheswaran)b Include document N2423 - Proposal for "Error correction on unified
ideographs in UCS"; in discussion regarding CJK Error corrections andprepare appropriate new text to be added to Principles and Procedures
documents.
M43 – in progress.
c Messrs. Umamaheswaran, Takayuki Sato, Tatsuo Kobayashi, and a Unicode
representative to consider the proposal in document N2467 - Proposal:"Additional guideline in the WG2 Principles and Procedures" and suggest
additions to the principles and procedures document.
M43 – in progress.
AI-42-7 The US national body (Mr. Michel Suignard / Dr. Asmus Freytag)b With reference to documents N2424 - Reconsidering request: “Font supply
guide for UCS development” (M41.13); Japan – Sato; 2002-03-25; N2443 Clarification to WG2 N3568R, M41.13 resolution in Singapore; Singapore;
2002-05-06; N2447 - IRG #19 Resolutions; IRG; 2002-05-09 (Resolution
M19.4), Dr. Asmus Freytag to prepare document N2445 on Font Policy
clarification, based on ad hoc discussions with the project editor and IRG
rapporteur and other interested parties.
M43 – in progress.
AI-42-8 The Irish national body (Mr. Michael Everson)b To act on the resolution M42.3 (Coptic disunification):
WG2 accepts the rationale and agrees in principle to the disunification of
Coptic script from Greek script proposed in document N2444 and invites the
proposers to submit a refined proposal for Coptic for future consideration by
WG2.
M43 – in progress.
d Is invited to prepare a separate contribution regarding guidebook symbols,
resulting from discussion on Irish comment T.15-3 in document N2486.
M43 – in progress.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusIn progress.

In progress.

In progress.

In progress.

In progress.

Page 45 of 51
2003-08-26

16.3 New action items from meeting 43, 2003-12-09/12, Tokyo, Japan
Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2554, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2553 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 43)
AI-43-1 Meeting Secretary - Dr. V.S. UMAmaheswaran
a To finalize the document N2554 containing the adopted meeting resolutions
and send it to the convener as soon as possible.
b To finalize the document N2553 containing the unconfirmed meeting minutes
and send it to the convener as soon as possible.
AI-43-2 Convener - Mr. Mike Ksar
a To communicate to SC2 the following WG2 resolutions:bcAI-43-3

a-1

M43.13 (Roadmap snapshot): WG2 accepts the snapshot of the latest
roadmaps in document N2559 and requests SC2 to circulate it to national
bodies and liaison organizations for referencing as a guide for future
submissions replacing the previous snapshot document N2461.
M43.16 (IRG – Member’s Chief Editors for CJK Ext. C):
WG2 endorses the IRG resolution M20.5 regarding appointment of a Chief
Editor from each of the IRG member bodies, towards ensuring the quality of
input to the work on CJK Extension C and all other contributions to the IRG
M43.17 (IRG Officers):
WG2 endorses the IRG nomination of Mr. Zhang Zhoucai as IRG Rapporteur
for the next term.
To investigate and obtain copies of final published Amendments for use by theeditor and contributing editors.
To include the following proposals from this meeting for the next meeting
agenda:
2530
Clarification to Resolution M42.13 on Hanja Compatibility
Updated 2543
Devanagari Glottal Stop
Updated 2546
Greek Metrical Symbols
Updated 2555
Glagolitic script
Updated 2505
Ol Chiki script
Updated 2560
Additional Cyrillic Characters for Siberian Yupik
2572 & 2573
107 compatibility Hanja
Updated 2558
Tibetan BrdaRaten characters
Updated 2524
Kharoshthi script
Updated 2544
Manichaean script
Updated 2545
Old Persian script
Updated 2547
Ancient Greek Musical Symbols
Updated 2549
Saurashtra script
Updated 2556
Avestan and Pahlavi
Editor of ISO/IEC 10646-1 Mr. Michel Suignard with assistance fromcontributing editors
To prepare the appropriate AM, DAM or PDAM texts, sub-division proposals,collection of editorial text for the next edition, corrigendum text, or entries incollections of characters for future coding, with assistance from other identified
parties, in accordance with the following:
Resolution M43.1 (Additions / Corrections for FPDAM-2 of 10646-1):
WG2 resolves:a. To add the following to the BMP:
1. 23D0 VERTICAL LINE EXTENSION, with the glyph as a verticalline consistent with the glyphs for vertical arrows
2. 03F9 GREEK CAPITAL LUNATE SIGMA SYMBOL with theglyph shown in document N2512
3. 03FA GREEK CAPITAL LETTER SAN with a glyph similar tothat shown in the sign column on page 4 of document N2522
4. 03FB GREEK SMALL LETTER SAN with a glyph similar to thatshown in the sign column on page 4 of document N2522
5. 1D6B LATIN SMALL LETTER UE with the glyph shown on page

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusCompleted; see
document N2554.
Completed; see
document N2553.
Completed; document
N2554 was sent toSC2 and discussed at
the SC2 plenary on
2002-12-09 after theWG2 meeting ended.

Completed; see
document SC2
N3671.zip and SC2
N3672.pdf (N2579R)

Page 46 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2554, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2553 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 43)
1 of document N2514
6. 0B71 ORIYA LETTER WA with the glyph shown on the rightwithin the circled pair on page 2 of document N2525
andb. To correct the glyph for 0B35 ORIYA LETTER VA to the glyph on theleft side within the circled pair on page 2 of document N2525.
WG2 further instructs its project editor to include the above additions andcorrection in the text for FDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
a-2 Resolution M43.2 (Character name rule for Loose Matching):
With reference to proposal for additional constraints on character names indocument N2536, WG2 resolves to add the following new rule to Annex L on
English character names in the standard, in order to enhance the uniquenessof character names::

StatusCompleted; see
document SC2
N3671.zip and SC2
N3672.pdf (N2579R)

Names are unique if SPACEs and HYPHENs are ignored, and if the strings“LETTER”, “CHARACTER”, and “DIGIT” are ignored in comparison of thenames.
Examples of unacceptable unique names:
KHAROSHTI LETTER AA
KHAROSHTI CHARACTER AA
These two names would not be unique if the strings “LETTER” and“CHARACTER” are ignored.
The following six character names will remain as exceptions to this rule, sincealready standardized character names will not be changed:
0F68 TIBETAN LETTER A
0F60 TIBETAN LETTER –A
0FB8 TIBETAN SUBJOINED LETTER A
0FB0 TIBETAN SUBJOINEDLETTER –A
116C HANGUL JUNGSEONG OE
1180 HANGUL JUNGSEONG O-E
WG2 further instructs its editor to merge the above rule to the existing text of
informative Annex L, with any needed editorial changes, and add it to the text
for FDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000.
a-3 Resolution M43.4 (Disposition of comments – FPDAM-2 to 10646-1): WG2
instructs its editor to prepare the final disposition of comments to ballot on
FPDAM-2 to 10646-1 based on document N2541 and discussion at thismeeting, including the following notable changes:

Completed; see
document SC2
N3671.zip and SC2
N3672.pdf (N2579R)

a.
b.
c.
d.

Change LTR to RTL in the name for collection 105
Interchange glyphs for 060D and 060E
Move character at 0659 to 0615
Rename FDFD to ARABIC LIGATURE BISMILLAH AR-RAHMAN ARRAHEEM
e. Rename 0658 to ARABIC MARK NOON GHUNNA
f. Add a clarification note regarding normalization, such as“Note: The goal of normalization is to arrive at unique strings after
normalization even though they may not be optimal for some purposes.”g. Change definition of Collection 110 to 2B00-2BFF
h. Annex Q: Add a machine readable version of the mapping informationi. Annex R: Add a machine readable version of the full names for Hangul
Syllables
j. Modify the glyph for 070F SYRIAC ABBREVIATION MARK
Update the informative note regarding 00AD SOFT HYPHEN in clause F.1.1
and modify the glyph for 1806 MONGOLIAN TODO SOFT HYPHEN
accordingly.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 47 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2554, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2553 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 43)
a-4 Resolution M43.5 (Progression of Amendment 2 to 10646-1): WG2 instructs
its project editor to prepare the text for FDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1, based on
the disposition of comments per resolution M43.4 above, and including otheraccepted changes from resolutions M43.1 through M43.3 above. WG2 further
instructs its editor to submit the disposition of comments and the FDAM-2 text
to the SC2 secretariat for FDAM ballot, with the unchanged completion target
date of 2003-04.
a-5 To check and fix the shapes for 0656, 0657, 0659, 06EE, 06EF and 06FF per
editorial comment from Iran in document N2520 before the next edition of thestandard.
a-6 To check and fix the glyph for Hot Beverage symbol 2615 per Irish commentin document N2520.
AI-43-4 Editor of ISO/IEC 10646-2: Mr. Michel Suignard with assistance fromcontributing editors
To prepare the appropriate AM, DAM or PDAM texts, sub-division proposals,collection of editorial text for the next edition, corrigendum text, or entries incollections of characters for future coding, with assistance from other identified
parties, in accordance with the following:
a-1 Resolution M43.6 (Editor’s input to Part 2 on CJK Compatibility Ideographmappings): WG2 accepts the technical corrections to CJK Compatibility
Source References listed in document N2563 and instructs its editor to include
these corrections in FDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2.
a-2 Resolution M43.7 (Progression of Amendment 1 to 10646-2): WG2 instructs
its project editor to prepare the text for FDAM-1 to ISO/IEC 10646-2 based on
the disposition of comments, which is mostly correction of errors, in document
N2542, and include the decision in resolution M43.6 above. WG2 further
instructs its editor to submit the disposition of comments and the FDAM-1 text
to the SC2 secretariat for FDAM ballot, with the unchanged completion target
date of 2003-04.
AI-43-5 Editor of ISO/IEC 10646 edition with merged parts: Mr. Michel Suignard
with assistance from contributing editors
To prepare the appropriate text with assistance from other identified parties,
in accordance with the following:a Resolution M43.11 (Single part standard):
WG2 instructs its editor to prepare a Revised Text for the single-part ISO/IEC
10646: 2003, reflecting the final texts of FDAM-2 to 10646-1: 2000 and FDAM1 to 10646-2: 2001 from this meeting, and all accepted changes arising out ofthe discussion on the feedback in documents N2527, N2528 and N2529 on
the working draft in document N2499R.

AI-43-6aAI-43-7aStatusCompleted; see
document SC2
N3671.zip and SC2
N3672.pdf (N2579R)

Completed; see
document SC2
N3673.zip and SC2
N3674.pdf (N2570R)
Completed; see
document SC2
N3673.zip.)

WG2 further instructs its editor to incorporate any additional changes arisingout of FDAM ballots on the above two amendments, and to forward the final
text to ITTF for publishing, incorporating any editorial changes needed toaccommodate the feedback comments, to replace the current published partsof 10646 and their accepted amendments until that date. The target date forsubmitting the final text to ITTF is 2003-09.
Ad hoc group on principles and procedures (lead - Dr. V.S.
UMAmaheswaran)
Update Principles and Procedures to include requirement for Source
References and Mapping information for ideographs in machine readable form
are sent to the editor.
IRG Rapporteur (Mr. Zhang Zhoucai)
To act on resolution M43.12 (IRG Support for Single part standard):
WG2 instructs the IRG to assist the project editor ina. reviewing the suitability of the font that has been used for Unicode V 3.1
for use in preparing the CJK charts for Extension B ideographs,
b. preparing a new set of charts in PDF format for BMP CJK Unified
ideographs
for finalization by 2003-05.

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 48 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2554, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2553 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 43)
b IRG editor is to ensure the source reference files in the amendments are insynch with the Super CJK database.
c Per discussion on document N2526 on Ideographic Strokes versus
Ideographs, IRG should separate the candidate characters for being Strokes
versus ideographs.
d With reference to document N2571, IRG is encouraged filter the input on
Ancient Ideographs before WG2 considers them.
e To act on resolution M43.15 (Basic international CJK sub-set): WG2 accepts
the IRG input in document N2539 (IRG N947) and encourages the IRG tocollect additional input and arrive at recommendations for a Basic international
Ideograph Subset and submit for review at the next WG2 meeting.
AI-43-8 The US national body (Mr. Michel Suignard / Dr. Asmus Freytag)a Working with the authors to submit a revision of document N2547 (- Proposal
to encode Ancient Greek Musical Symbols in the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae
Graecae Project (University of California, Irvine); 2002-11-07) based oncomments received at the meeting and any other feedback received before
the next meeting.
AI-43-9 The Irish national body (Mr. Michael Everson)a To act on resolution M43.14 (Roadmap - Plane 3): WG2 accepts therecommendation in document N 2515 from the Roadmap ad hoc committee
for adding Plane 3 as an additional supplementary plane to the roadmap,
identifying it as ‘Plane 3’.
b To update the roadmap document reflecting document N2549 on Saurashtrian
script moving to Plane 1 from current Plane 0.
c To update the roadmap document reflecting document N2547 on Ancient
Greek Musical Symbols in Plane 1
d To update the roadmap to provide some guidelines for differentiating
Ideographic Strokes from Ideographs addressing concerns expressed in
document N2526.
e To submit a revision of document N2556 on Avestan and Pahlavi based oncomments received at the meeting and any other feedback received before
the next meeting.
f To work with the authors and to submit a revision of document N2549 on
Saurashtra script based on comments received at the meeting and any otherfeedback received before the next meeting.
g To submit a revision of document N2544 on Manichean script based oncomments received at the meeting and any other feedback received before
the next meeting.
h To submit a revision of document N2545 on Old Persian script based oncomments received at the meeting and any other feedback received before
the next meeting.
I To submit a revision of document 2560, working with the authors, on
Additional Cyrillic Characters for Siberian Yupik.
j To submit a revision of document N2505 on Ol Chiki script based oncomments received at the meeting and any other feedback received before
the next meeting.
k To submit a revision of document N2555 on Glagolitic reflecting comments
received at the meeting and any other feedback received before the next
meeting.
l To get further evidence of usage from the authors on Afghani sign proposed in
document N2523.
m To inform experts from India on acceptance of Oriya character WA at 0B71
and change of shape of Oriya character VA.
n To get feedback working with the authors of the proposal on Devanagari
Glottal Stop in document N2543 (Proposal to add Devanagari Glottal Stop;
Peter Constable, Steve Smith; 2002-11-01) from other users of Devanagari
script, including the Government of India.
AI-43-10 Chinese national body (Messrs, Cheng Zhuang, Lobsang Tokeme, Zhang
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

StatusPage 49 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2554, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2553 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 43)
Zhoucai)a To act on resolution M43.9 (Tibetan BrdaRten proposal): WG2 notes the
proposal for 956 BrdaRten Tibetan characters in document N2558, and invites
all national bodies to review and provide feedback to the authors, and invites
the Chinese national body to submit a revised proposal incorporating the
feedback, prior to the next WG2 meeting.
b To feedback to HKSAR on resolution M43.8 (6 characters from Hong Kong
SAR): With reference to the request for four precomposed characters and two
symbols in document N2513 from HKSAR, WG2 resolves to reject the request
for four precomposed characters since combining sequences in the standard
can be used to represent these. Further, WG2 invites HKSAR to provide
more clarification on the usage of the two proposed symbols.
AI-43-11 ROK national body (Professor Kyongsok Kim)a Invited to make a contribution on Hangul Transliteration Rules that can beapplied to all Hangul contributions (reference discussion on ROK comments in
document N2520.)
AI-43-12 Unicode Consortium (Dr. Asmus Freytag)a Working with the authors, to submit a revised document N2524 (Proposal to
Encode Kharoshthi in Plane 1 of ISO/IEC 10646; Andrew Glass, Stefan
Baums, Richard Salomon – via Unicode; 2002-11-20) based on comments
received at the meeting and any other feedback received before the next
meeting.
b To make sure written Unicode liaison report document N2516 is sent to theconvener.
c To take note of Irish contribution in document N2509 on shaping behaviour of
Syriac characters.
AI-43-13 DPRK – Messrs. Ham Myong HO, Ri Kwang HO
a To act on resolution M43.10 (Request for additional Hanja Character Source
References): With reference to the request from DPR of Korea for three Hanja
character source references in document N2517, and two Hanja charactersource references in document N2518, WG2 invites DPRK to review these
proposed references, with assistance from the IRG, prior to re-submitting therequests for future consideration by WG2.
b To act on resolution M43.3 (Compatibility Hanja characters):
WG2 accepts the removal of 122 Compatibility Hanja characters FA70 to
FAE9 from FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1. WG2 provisionally accepts, andinvites DPRK and other interested parties to review, the refined replacement
set of 107 Compatibility Hanja characters (see Korean ad hoc report in
document N 2573, corrections to the FPDAM-2 charts in document N2540,
and the code chart showing the 107 characters in document N2572) for further
consideration at the next WG2 meeting.
AI-43-14 All national bodies and liaison organizations
a To take note of resolution M43.18 (Future Meetings):

StatusWG 2 meetings:
Meeting 44 -- 2003-10-20/23, San Francisco Bay area, USA
Meeting 45 -- 2004-06 (tentative), Europe (waiting for a host); backup
is USA
Meeting 46 – 2005-xx (tentative), Asia
IRG meetings:
IRG 21 - China 2003-04-07/11
IRG 22 – October 2003 – prior to WG2 meeting 44; Place to be
determined,
IRG 23 – Taipei (tentative) and Unicode Consortium will be backup, in 2004.
b To take note of resolution M43.16 (IRG – Member’s Chief Editors for CJK Ext.
C): WG2 endorses the IRG resolution M20.5 regarding appointment of a Chief
Editor from each of the IRG member bodies, towards ensuring the quality of
input to the work on CJK Extension C and all other contributions to the IRG.
Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 50 of 51
2003-08-26

Item Assigned to / action (Reference resolutions in document N2554, andunconfirmed minutes in document N2553 - this document you arereading - for Meeting 43)
c To review and feedback to DPRK per resolution M43.3 (Compatibility Hanja
characters): WG2 accepts the removal of 122 Compatibility Hanja characters
FA70 to FAE9 from FPDAM-2 to ISO/IEC 10646-1. WG2 provisionallyaccepts, and invites DPRK and other interested parties to review, the refined
replacement set of 107 Compatibility Hanja characters (see Korean ad hoc
report in document N 2573, corrections to the FPDAM-2 charts in document
N2540, and the code chart showing the 107 characters in document N2572)
for further consideration at the next WG2 meeting.
d To review and feedback to China per resolution M43.9 (Tibetan BrdaRten
proposal): WG2 notes the proposal for 956 BrdaRten Tibetan characters in
document N2558, and invites all national bodies to review and provide
feedback to the authors, and invites the Chinese national body to submit arevised proposal incorporating the feedback, prior to the next WG2 meeting.
e To review and feedback to IRG based on resolution M43.15 (Basicinternational CJK sub-set): WG2 accepts the IRG input in document N2539(IRG N947) and encourages the IRG to collect additional input and arrive atrecommendations for a Basic international Ideograph Subset and submit forreview at the next WG2 meeting.
f To review and feedback on document N2546 - Proposal for encoding Greek
Metrical Symbols in the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae Graecae Project (Universityof California, Irvine); 2002-11-07.
g To review and feedback on document N2555 - Revised proposal for encoding
the Glagolitic script in the UCS ; Michael Everson and Ralph Cleminson;
2002-12-04.
h To review and feedback on document N2505 - Revised proposal for encoding
the Ol Chiki script in the UCS; Michael Everson, R. C. Hansdah & N. C.
Murmu; 2002-11-03
I To review and feedback on document N2560 - Proposal for Encoding
Additional Cyrillic Characters for Siberian Yupik; SIL International (contacts:
Jim Brase, Peter Constable); 2002-12-06.
j To review and feedback on document N2524 - Proposal to Encode Kharoshthi
in Plane 1 of ISO/IEC 10646; Andrew Glass, Stefan Baums, Richard Salomon– via Unicode; 2002-11-20.
k To review and feedback on document N2544 - Revised proposal to encode
the Manichaean script in the UCS; Everson; 2002-12-03.
l To review and feedback on document N2545 - Revised proposal to encode
the Old Persian script in the UCS; Everson; 2002-12-03.
m To review and feedback on document N2547 - Proposal to encode Ancient
Greek Musical Symbols in the UCS; Thesaurus Linguae Graecae Project(University of California, Irvine); 2002-11-07.
n To review and feedback on document N2549 - Proposal to encode theSaurashtra script in the UCS; Jeyakumar Chinnakkonda Krishnamoorty andMichael Everson; 2002-12-03.
o To review and feedback on document N2556 - Revised proposal to encode
the Avestan and Pahlavi script in the UCS; Michael Everson; 2002-12-04.

Status(Please notify me of any errors you detect in these minutes – send email to: umavs@ca.ibm.com. Thanks. Uma)================ END OF DOCUMENT … ===============

Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes
N2553

JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2-M43, Tokyo, Japan
2002-12-09/12

Page 51 of 51
2003-08-26