Matthew Flatt <xxxxxx@cs.utah.edu> writes:

> A new draft of the SRFI is on the web page.

Thanks a lot!

With all the Unicode knowledge combined on this list, I think it
would be worthwhile to focus on a single goal now: Find places in
the proposal that either would make it difficult to implement a
high-level Unicode API on top of it, or that would make it
difficult for implementations to stick to ASCII.

Just as an example, implementing a string API based on grapheme
clusters (or abstract characters, which I think most people here
mean) on top of codepoint vectors is not much of a problem.

After we removed any such problems, we can focus on removing any
remaining issue listed in the document.

Greetings,
        -- Jorgen

--
((email . "xxxxxx@forcix.cx") (www . "http://www.forcix.cx/")
 (gpg   . "1024D/028AF63C")   (irc . "nick forcer on IRCnet"))