OK... now I've got exact changes I can make to the document. I'll
have to get and install SP so I can test the DTD from now on, but
that's long overdue anyway.
The real question is: what does this mean to information providers?
Does it solve any of their problems?
For example: what good is ISO10646 without support for UCS-2 or UTF-8
(or even ISO-2022-JP)?
If getting ISO10646 in there is just a political move, then the ICADD
comparison is fair. But the ICADD changes were a key part of a
_solution_, not just a statement of direction.
I don't see how putting half the solution -- ISO10646 as a document
character set, with no deployed support and no specification for
support of other encodings -- in the 2.0 document is better than
leaving 2.0 as is and providing a complete specification in another
document.
Dan