Consensus Call Tranche 8 Summary - Addendum

[Kenneth Whistler]

John said:

> Thanks.  I will save this text in case there is agreement that
> it should be used.  I believe that the first questions are the
> ones that Andrew stated implicitly: whether we believe Rationale
> should evolve in this direction and, then, whether this type of
> comment and pointer is the optimal (or only) one to make.
> 
> I also wonder whether the definition of a "technical character"
> is well understood within the community that might be reading
> that document.

See suggested clarification below.

--Ken

> 
>    best,
>    john
> 
> 
> --On Wednesday, 22 October, 2008 17:36 +0200 Mark Davis
> <mark at macchiato.com> wrote:

> > [In 4.4. Registry Restrictions, after the first paragraph,
> > add:]
> > 
> > Note: In constructing registry policies that disallow 
> > historic or technical characters

--> characters used in historic writing systems or characters
    whose use is restricted to specialized, highly technical
    contexts,
     
> > to reduce opportunities for confusion,
> > some relevant information may be found at [Unicode-Exclusions]
> > and [Unicode-Security].

It could be restrung to read better, but that is a more
self-explanatory phrasing for the characters Mark has
in mind.

--Ken