Corrigendum #9

Asmus Freytag asmusf at
Tue Jun 3 11:15:27 CDT 2014

Nicely put.


On 6/3/2014 12:09 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
> On 2014/06/03 07:08, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>> On 6/2/2014 2:53 PM, Markus Scherer wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:32 PM, David Starner <prosfilaes at
>>> <mailto:prosfilaes at>> wrote:
>>>     I would especially discourage any web browser from handling
>>>     these; they're noncharacters used for unknown purposes that are
>>>     undisplayable and if used carelessly for their stated purpose, can
>>>     probably trigger serious bugs in some lamebrained utility.
>>> I don't expect "handling these" in web browsers and lamebrained
>>> utilities. I expect "treat like unassigned code points".
> Expecting them to be treated like unassigned code points shows that 
> their use is a bad idea: Since when does the Unicode Consortium use 
> unassigned code points (and the like) in plain sight?
>> I can't shake the suspicion that Corrigendum #9 is not actually solving
>> a general problem, ...
> I have to fully agree with Asmus, Richard, Shawn and others that the 
> use of non-characters in CLDR is a very bad and dangerous example.
> However convenient the misuse of some of these codepoints in CLDR may 
> be, it sets a very bad example for everybody else. Unicode itself 
> should not just be twice as careful with the use of its own 
> codepoints, but 10 times as careful.
> I'd strongly suggest that completely independent of when and how 
> Corrigendum #9 gets tweaked or fixed, a quick and firm plan gets 
> worked out for how to get rid of these codepoints in CLDR data. The 
> sooner, the better.
> Regards,   Martin.
> _______________________________________________
> Unicode mailing list
> Unicode at

More information about the Unicode mailing list