Skip to content

Conversation

@eggrobin
Copy link
Member

Same procedure as #888, as this one already has a script code.

@eggrobin eggrobin requested a review from markusicu September 23, 2024 16:02
@roozbehp
Copy link
Contributor

I don't understand why you need this. Proto-cuneiform isn't planned for 17.0, is it?

@eggrobin
Copy link
Member Author

I don't understand why you need this.

Because I am drafting properties for the Archaic Cuneiform Numerals proposal, which introduces sc=Pcun and scx=Xsux Pcun characters, and I do not want to deal with divergent versions of these Java files (it is only in the actual data files that I can do automated conflict resolution).

Adding these to the enumeration several versions ahead has been standard procedure, see #888, #660, #546, and #443. See the last one of those for more explanations.

@roozbehp
Copy link
Contributor

I see. I thought these were sc=Xsux.

@eggrobin
Copy link
Member Author

I thought these were sc=Xsux.

The proposal has all three of scx=Xsux, scx=Xsux Pcun, and scx=Pcun (where Xsux « wins » for the Script property). See §§1, 2.3.3, and 2.3.4.

@eggrobin eggrobin merged commit 1f2d9a0 into unicode-org:main Sep 23, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants