"code points are characters"

[aphillips]

Proposed comment

4.5 Code points
https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#code-points

Code points are sometimes referred to as characters and in certain contexts are prefixed with "0x" rather than "U+".

I18N has a long history of avoiding the term "character" and recommending against its casual use. This generally means that we're pedantic about using the terms code unit (generally for bytes or for UTF-16's code units), code point (for Unicode code points), and grapheme (for user-perceived characters that might consist of a sequence of code points). Use of the term "character", particularly outside of character encoding related contexts, results in confusion about byte != character != grapheme.

Should the above definition of 'character' be kept intact? Note that I18N Glossary does not define a standalone term character or even Unicode character (it does provide Unicode scalar value and Unicode code point in addition to the general terms)

Instructions:

This follows the process at https://w3c.github.io/i18n-activity/guidelines/review-instructions.html

1. Create the review comment you want to propose by replacing the prompts above these instructions, but LEAVE ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS INTACT

2. Add one or more t:... labels. These should use ids from specdev establish a link to that doc.

3. Set a label to identify the spec: this starts with s: followed by the spec's short name. If you are unable to do that, ask a W3C staff contact to help.

4. Ask the i18n WG to review your comment.

5. After discussion with the i18n WG, raise an issue in the repository of the WG that owns the spec. Use the text above these instructions as the starting point for that comment, but add any suggestions that arose from the i18n WG. In the other WG's repo, add an 'i18n-needs-resolution' label to the new issue. If you think any of the participants in layout requirements task force groups would be interested in following the discussion, add also the appropriate i18n-*lreq label(s).

6. Delete the text below that says 'url_for_the_issue_raised', then add in its place the URL for the issue you raised in the other WG's repository. Do NOT remove the initial '§ '. Do NOT use [...](...) notation – you need to delete the placeholder, then paste the URL.

7. Remove the 'pending' label, and add a 'needs-resolution' tag to this tracker issue.

8. If you added an *lreq label, add the label 'spec-type-issue', add the corresponding language label, and a label to indicate the relevant typographic feature(s), eg. 'i:line_breaking'. The latter represent categories related to the Language Enablement Index, and all start with i:.

9. Edit this issue to REMOVE ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS & THE PROPOSED COMMENT, ie. the line below that is '---' and all the text before it to the very start of the issue.

---

This is a tracker issue. Only discuss things here if they are i18n WG internal meta-discussions about the issue. Contribute to the actual discussion at the following link:

§ url_for_the_issue_raised