On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 09:48:40PM +0000, Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > -------------------------------------------- > On Tue, 28/11/17, Ernesto A. Fernández <ernesto.mnd.fernandez@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Is that necessary? I think people can find the > > Unicode Standard on their > > own. Even if I did > > provide a link, it's a pdf, so people would still > > need > > to look up the right sections. It's > > not going to save anybody much work. > > Yes, it is necessary. No, it is not a pdf. The code sample is inlined in the older version of this technical report: > > http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/tr15-18.html#Hangul This is extremely old, clearly not the version of Unicode I'm referencing. > The code samples, etc had been splitted off and referenced in the current version: > > http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/#Hangul_Composition This does not link to the code sample at all, in fact it links to a page that links to a page that links to a page that links to the pdf. > Please: > 1. include the above urls when you re-submit the next revision of the patch. > > 2. include a brief description of minimal example - e.g. touch "\xXX\xYY\xZZ..." to create a minimal empty file for testing, > in the commit message. The way to test this patch is by creating a Hangul filename under MacOS and trying to open it under linux, as the reporter did. You will not notice anything wrong if you only work under linux. > "People could look it up" is not an excuse not to give precise pointers to relevant information. > I would say "Section 3.12 of the Unicode Standard, version 10.0" is a very precise pointer. By the way, your mail client is making a huge mess of this thread; I have no idea what message you are replying to anymore.
