More fun with descriptions: Divehi

[Frank Ellermann]

Doug Ewell wrote:
 
>> "right or wrong, mirror the standard" was the plan.
 
> That was the plan.  The plan has changed, at least somewhat,
> with some list members feeling it is important to use the
> "correct" character in Description fields even if it does
> not mirror the standard.

I didn't read all messages of the past 10 weeks, so maybe I
missed some details. In one case the "Description" issue was
apparently a discrepancy between different source standards.

Personally I'd feel more comfortable if derivations from the
sources are noted as "Comment".  If an u+27 in the sources
is plain wrong, then the subtag registry "description" field
isn't the ideal place to fix it.

The way it went with GG, IM, JE, and now maybe also DD + YD
was cleaner (and I first supported various ad hoc ideas for
these cases until Debbie cleaned it at the right place).
  
> the Divehi change does not involve any apostrophes

:-)  And we made sure that the registry supports any Unicode.

Bye, Frank