Reserved general punctuation

[Frank Ellermann]

Paul Hoffman wrote:

> The danger with implementing the first is that the Unicode
> Consortium folks can easily change the boundaries of
> Other_Default_Ignorable_Code_Point if they really want a 
> non-ignorable code point to be at a certain position for
> some bureaucratic or aesthetic reason.

What I had in mind, unassigned code points in the dingbats
block, would best be described as "reserved".  They can
leave it unassigned forever.  They can smuggle in some new
dingbats unrelated to the original unassigned symbol which
was found to be already listed elsewhere.  If they assign
a letter relevant for IDNA in this position it is madness,
a concept of "blocks" has to mean something.

The table generator scripts could list such critical code
points, maybe the Unicode folks are willing to guarantee
to be not mad (with a new persistent property or similar).

> I think the second may be safer.

The meaning of such unassigned gaps *within* blocks (not
at the beginning or end) is quite obvious, the "safer"
approach could create convoluted abuse opportunities (?)

 Frank