Fwd: Suspected error in the ISO 15924 standard

Ken Whistler kenwhistler at sonic.net
Wed Apr 27 13:19:40 CDT 2022

FYI for the list


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: Suspected error in the ISO 15924 standard
Date: 	Wed, 27 Apr 2022 08:11:51 -0700
From: 	Ken Whistler <kenwhistler at sonic.net>
To: 	Wáng Yifán <747.neutron at gmail.com>


On 4/27/2022 12:50 AM, Wáng Yifán via Unicode wrote:
> Is the Unicode contact form a valid channel to report what seems a bug
> in the ISO 15924 text?

No, not really. The Unicode Consortium maintains the registry for ISO 
15924, but TC46 is the relevant ISO committee responsible for the text 
of the standard.

Regarding your observations below, yes, this is a defect in the text of 
the standard, and was already pointed out to TC46 during the balloting 
last fall. Those of us who pointed out the problem and who suggested an 
easy fix ended up overruled by the ISO Central Secretariat, who made 
(IMO) a bad call on this one.

My advice now is just to ignore the issue in the text of the standard. 
It has no practical effect on the way the registry actually works.


> Specifically:
> In the recently revised ISO 15924:2022, page 3, among numeric script
> codes it says:
>> 700–799 (unassigned)
> But the range has been used since 2014 by Duployan, and according to
> the notice of changes https://unicode.org/iso15924/codechanges.html:
>> On 2010-07-18 the range 700-799 was assigned to "Shorthands and other 
>> notations".
> So they shouldn't have been marked "unassigned" anymore at the point
> of revision.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20220427/4f31442b/attachment.htm>

More information about the Unicode mailing list