doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 619 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3718.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3718.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b07a69a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3718.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,619 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                         R. McGowan
+Request for Comments: 3718                                       Unicode
+Category: Informational                                    February 2004
+
+
+    A Summary of Unicode Consortium Procedures, Policies, Stability,
+                           and Public Access
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
+   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
+   memo is unlimited.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved.
+
+Abstract
+
+   This memo describes various internal workings of the Unicode
+   Consortium for the benefit of participants in the IETF.  It is
+   intended solely for informational purposes.  Included are discussions
+   of how the decision-making bodies of the Consortium work and their
+   procedures, as well as information on public access to the character
+   encoding & standardization processes.
+
+1.  Introduction
+
+   This memo describes various internal workings of the Unicode
+   Consortium for the benefit of participants in the IETF.  It is
+   intended solely for informational purposes.  Included are discussions
+   of how the decision-making bodies of the Consortium work and their
+   procedures, as well as information on public access to the character
+   encoding & standardization processes.
+
+2.  About The Unicode Consortium
+
+   The Unicode Consortium is a corporation.  Legally speaking, it is a
+   "California Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation", organized under
+   section 501 C(6) of the Internal Revenue Service Code of the United
+   States.  As such, it is a "business league" not focussed on profiting
+   by sales or production of goods and services, but neither is it
+   formally a "charitable" organization.  It is an alliance of member
+   companies whose purpose is to "extend, maintain, and promote the
+   Unicode Standard".  To this end, the Consortium keeps a small office,
+   a few editorial and technical staff, World Wide Web presence, and
+   mail list presence.
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 1]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   The corporation is presided over by a Board of Directors who meet
+   annually.  The Board is comprised of individuals who are elected
+   annually by the full members for three-year terms.  The Board
+   appoints Officers of the corporation to run the daily operations.
+
+   Membership in the Consortium is open to "all corporations, other
+   business entities, governmental agencies, not-for-profit
+   organizations and academic institutions" who support the Consortium's
+   purpose.  Formally, one class of voting membership is recognized, and
+   dues-paying members are typically for-profit corporations, research
+   and educational institutions, or national governments.  Each such
+   full member sends representatives to meetings of the Unicode
+   Technical Committee (see below), as well as to a brief annual
+   Membership meeting.
+
+3.  The Unicode Technical Committee
+
+   The Unicode Technical Committee (UTC) is the technical decision
+   making body of the Consortium.  The UTC inherited the work and prior
+   decisions of the Unicode Working Group (UWG) that was active prior to
+   formation of the Consortium in January 1991.
+
+   Formally, the UTC is a technical body instituted by resolution of the
+   board of directors.  Each member appoints one principal and one or
+   two alternate representatives to the UTC.  UTC representatives
+   frequently do, but need not, act as the ordinary member
+   representatives for the purposes of the annual meeting.
+
+   The UTC is presided over by a Chair and Vice-Chair, appointed by the
+   Board of Directors for an unspecified term of service.
+
+   The UTC meets 4 to 5 times a year to discuss proposals, additions,
+   and various other technical topics.  Each meeting lasts 3 to 4 full
+   days.  Meetings are held in locations decided upon by the membership,
+   frequently in the San Francisco Bay Area.  There is no fee for
+   participation in UTC meetings.  Agendas for meetings are not
+   generally posted to any public forum, but meeting dates, locations,
+   and logistics are posted well in advance on the "Unicode Calendar of
+   Events" web page.
+
+   At the discretion of the UTC chair, meetings are open to
+   participation of member and liaison organizations, and to observation
+   by others.  The minutes of meetings are also posted publicly on the
+   "UTC Minutes" page of the Unicode Web site.
+
+   All UTC meetings are held jointly with the INCITS Technical Committee
+   L2, the body responsible for Character Code standards in the United
+   States.  They constitute "ad hoc" meetings of the L2 body and are
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 2]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   usually followed by a full meeting of the L2 committee.  Further
+   information on L2 is available on the official INCITS web page.
+
+4.  Unicode Technical Committee Procedures
+
+   The formal procedures of the UTC are publicly available in a document
+   entitled "UTC Procedures", available from the Consortium, and on the
+   Unicode web site.
+
+   Despite the invocation of Robert's Rules of Order, UTC meetings are
+   conducted with relative informality in view of the highly technical
+   nature of most discussions.  Meetings focus on items from a technical
+   agenda organized and published by the UTC Chair prior to the meeting.
+   Technical items are usually proposals in one of the following
+   categories:
+
+      1. Addition of new characters (whole scripts, additions to
+         existing scripts, or other characters)
+
+      2. Preparation and Editing of Technical Reports and Standards
+
+      3. Changes in the semantics of specific characters
+
+      4. Extensions to the encoding architecture and forms of use
+
+   Note: There may also be changes to the architecture, character
+   properties, or semantics.  Such changes are rare, and are always
+   constrained by the "Unicode Stability Policies" posted on the Unicode
+   web site.  Significant changes are undertaken in consultation with
+   liaison organizations, such as W3C and IETF, which have standards
+   that may be affected by such changes.  See sections 5 and 6 below.
+
+   Typical outputs of the UTC are:
+
+      1. The Unicode Standard, major and minor versions (including the
+         Unicode Character Database)
+
+      2. Unicode Technical Reports
+
+      3. Stand-alone Unicode Technical Standards
+
+      4. Formal resolutions
+
+      5. Liaison statements and instructions to the Unicode liaisons to
+         other organizations.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 3]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   For each technical item on the meeting agenda, the general process is
+   as follows:
+
+      1. Introduction by the topic sponsor
+
+      2. Proposals and discussion
+
+      3. Consensus statements or formal motions
+
+      4. Assignment of formal actions to implement decisions
+
+5.  Unicode Technical Committee Motions
+
+   Technical topics of any complexity never proceed from initial
+   proposal to final ratification or adoption into the standard in the
+   course of one UTC meeting.  The UTC members and presiding officers
+   are aware that technical changes to the standard have broad
+   consequences to other standards, implementers, and end-users of the
+   standard.  Input from other organizations and experts is often vital
+   to the understanding of various proposals and for successful adoption
+   into the standard.
+
+   Technical topics are decided in UTC through the use of formal
+   motions, either taken in meetings, or by means of thirty-day letter
+   ballots.  Formal UTC motions are of two types:
+
+      1. Simple motions
+
+      2. Precedents
+
+   Simple motions may pass with a simple majority constituting more than
+   50 percent of the qualified voting members; or by a special majority
+   constituting two-thirds or more of the qualified voting members.
+
+   Precedents are defined, according to the UTC Procedures as either
+
+      (A) an existing Unicode Policy, or
+
+      (B) an explicit precedent.
+
+   Precedents must be passed or overturned by a special majority.
+
+   Examples of implicit precedents include:
+
+      1. Publication of a character in the standard
+
+      2. Published normative character properties
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 4]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+      3. Algorithms required for formal conformance
+
+   An Explicit Precedent is a policy, procedure, encoding, algorithm, or
+   other item that is established by a separate motion saying (in
+   effect) that a particular prior motion establishes a precedent.
+
+   A proposal may be passed either by a formal motion and vote, or by
+   consensus.  If there is broad agreement as to the proposal, and no
+   member wishes to force a vote, then the proposal passes by consensus
+   and is recorded as such in the minutes.
+
+6.  Unicode Consortium Policies
+
+   Because the Unicode Standard is continually evolving in an attempt to
+   reach the ideal of encoding "all the world's scripts", new characters
+   will constantly be added.  In this sense, the standard is unstable:
+   in the standard's useful lifetime, there may never be a final point
+   at which no more characters are added.  Realizing this, the
+   Consortium has adopted certain policies to promote and maintain
+   stability of the characters that are already encoded, as well as
+   laying out a Roadmap to future encodings.
+
+   The overall policies of the Consortium with regard to encoding
+   stability, as well as other issues such as privacy, are published on
+   a "Unicode Consortium Policies" web page.  Deliberations and encoding
+   proposals in the UTC are bound by these policies.
+
+   The general effect of the stability policies may be stated in this
+   way: once a character is encoded, it will not be moved or removed and
+   its name will not be changed.  Any of those actions has the potential
+   for causing obsolescence of data, and they are not permitted.  The
+   canonical combining class and decompositions of characters will not
+   be changed in any way that affects normalization.  In this sense,
+   normalization, such as that used for International Domain Naming and
+   "early normalization" for use on the World Wide Web, is fixed and
+   stable for every character at the time that character is encoded.
+   (Any changes that are undertaken because of outright errors in
+   properties or decompositions are dealt with by means of an adjunct
+   data file so that normalization stability can still be maintained by
+   those who need it.)
+
+   Once published, each version of the Unicode Standard is absolutely
+   stable and will never be changed retroactively.  Implementations or
+   specifications that refer to a specific version of the Unicode
+   Standard can rely upon this stability.  If future versions of such
+   implementations or specifications upgrade to a future version of the
+   Unicode Standard, then some changes may be necessary.
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 5]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   Property values of characters, such as directionality for the Unicode
+   Bidi algorithm, may be changed between versions of the standard in
+   some circumstances.  As less-well documented characters and scripts
+   are encoded, the exact character properties and behavior may not be
+   well known at the time the characters are first encoded.  As more
+   experience is gathered in implementing the newly encoded characters,
+   adjustments in the properties may become necessary.  This re-working
+   is kept to a minimum.  New and old versions of the relevant property
+   tables are made available on the Consortium's web site.
+
+   Normative and some informative data about characters is kept in the
+   Unicode Character Database (UCD).  The structure of many of these
+   property values will not be changed.  Instead, when new properties
+   are defined, the Consortium adds new files for these properties, so
+   as not to affect the stability of existing implementations that use
+   the values and properties defined in the existing formats and files.
+   The latest version of the UCD is available on the Consortium web site
+   via the "Unicode Data" heading.
+
+   Note on data redistribution: Unlike the situation with IETF
+   documents, some parts of the Unicode Character Database may have
+   restrictions on their verbatim redistribution with source-code
+   products.  Users should read the notices in files they intend to use
+   in such products.  The information contained in the UCD may be freely
+   used to create derivative works (such as programs, compressed data
+   files, subroutines, data structures, etc.) that may be redistributed
+   freely, but some files may not be redistributable verbatim.  Such
+   restrictions on Unicode data files are never meant to prohibit or
+   control the use of the data in products, but only to help ensure that
+   users retrieve the latest official releases of data files when using
+   the data in products.
+
+7.  UTC and ISO (WG2)
+
+   The character repertoire, names, and general architecture of the
+   Unicode Standard are identical to the parallel international standard
+   ISO/IEC 10646.  ISO/IEC 10646 only contains a small fraction of the
+   semantics, properties and implementation guidelines supplied by the
+   Unicode Standard and associated technical standards and reports.
+   Implementations conformant to Unicode are conformant to ISO/IEC
+   10646.
+
+   ISO/IEC 10646 is maintained by the committee ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2.
+   The WG2 committee is composed of national body representatives to
+   ISO.  Details on the ISO organization may be found on the official
+   web site of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
+
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 6]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   Details and history of the relationship between ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2
+   and Unicode, Inc. may be found in Appendix C of The Unicode Standard.
+   (A PDF rendition of the most recent printed edition of the Unicode
+   Standard can be found on the Unicode web site.)
+
+   WG2 shares with UTC the policies regarding stability: WG2 neither
+   removes characters nor changes their names once published.  Changes
+   in both standards are closely tracked by the respective committees,
+   and a very close working relationship is fostered to maintain
+   synchronization between the standards.
+
+   The Unicode Collation Algorithm (UCA) is one of a small set of other
+   independent standards defined and maintained by UTC.  It is not,
+   properly speaking, part of the Unicode Standard itself, but is
+   separately defined in Unicode Technical Standard #10 (UTS #10).
+   There is no conformance relationship between the two standards,
+   except that conformance to a specific base version of the Unicode
+   Standard (e.g., 4.0) is specified in a particular version of a UTS.
+   The collation algorithm specified in UTS #10 is conformant to ISO/IEC
+   14651, maintained by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2, and the two organizations
+   maintain a close relationship.  Beyond what is specified in ISO/IEC
+   14651, the UCA contains additional constraints on collation,
+   specifies additional options, and provides many more implementation
+   guidelines.
+
+8.  Process of Technical Changes to the Unicode Standard
+
+   Changes to The Unicode Standard are of two types: architectural
+   changes, and character additions.
+
+   Most architectural changes do not affect ISO/IEC 10646, for example,
+   the addition of various character properties to Unicode.  Those
+   architectural changes that do affect both standards, such as
+   additional UTF formats or allocation of planes, are very carefully
+   coordinated by the committees.  As always, on the UTC side,
+   architectural changes that establish precedents are carefully
+   monitored and the above-described rules and procedures are followed.
+
+   Additional characters for inclusion in the The Unicode Standard must
+   be approved both by the UTC and by WG2.  Proposals for additional
+   characters enter the standards process in one of several ways:
+   through...
+
+      1. a national body member of WG2
+
+      2. a member company or associate of UTC
+
+      3. directly from an individual "expert" contributor
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 7]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   The two committees have jointly produced a "Proposal Summary Form"
+   that is required to accompany all additional character proposals.
+   This form may be found online at the WG2 web site, and on the Unicode
+   web site along with information about "Submitting New Characters or
+   Scripts".  Instructions for submitting proposals to UTC may likewise
+   be found online.
+
+   Often, submission of proposals to both committees (UTC and WG2) is
+   simultaneous.  Members of UTC also frequently forward to WG2
+   proposals that have been initially reviewed by UTC.
+
+   In general, a proposal that is submitted to UTC before being
+   submitted to WG2 passes through several stages:
+
+      1. Initial presentation to UTC
+
+      2. Review and re-drafting
+
+      3. Forwarding to WG2 for consideration
+
+      4. Re-drafting for technical changes
+
+      5. Balloting for approval in UTC
+
+      6. Re-forwarding and recommendation to WG2
+
+      7. At least two rounds of international balloting in ISO
+
+   About two years are required to complete this process.  Initial
+   proposals most often do not include sufficient information or
+   justification to be approved.  These are returned to the submitters
+   with comments on how the proposal needs to be amended or extended.
+   Repertoire addition proposals that are submitted to WG2 before being
+   submitted to UTC are generally forwarded immediately to UTC through
+   committee liaisons.  The crucial parts of the process (steps 5
+   through 7 above) are never short-circuited.  A two-thirds majority in
+   UTC is required for approval at step 5.
+
+   Proposals for additional scripts are required to be coordinated with
+   relevant user communities.  Often there are ad-hoc subcommittees of
+   UTC or expert mail list participants who are responsible for actually
+   drafting proposals, garnering community support, or representing user
+   communities.
+
+   The rounds of international balloting in step 7 have participation
+   both by UTC and WG2, though UTC does not directly vote in the ISO
+   process.
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 8]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   Occasionally a proposal approved by one body is considered too
+   immature for approval by the other body, and may be blocked de-facto
+   by either of the two.  Only after both bodies have approved the
+   additional characters do they proceed to the rounds of international
+   balloting.  (The first round is a draft international standard during
+   which some changes may occur, the second round is final approval
+   during which only editorial changes are made.)
+
+   This process assures that proposals for additional characters are
+   mature and stable by the time they appear in a final international
+   ballot.
+
+9.  Public Access to the Character Encoding Process
+
+   While Unicode, Inc. is a membership organization, and the final say
+   in technical matters rests with UTC, the process is quite open to
+   public input and scrutiny of processes and proposals.  There are many
+   influential individual experts and industry groups who are not
+   formally members, but whose input to the process is taken seriously
+   by UTC.
+
+   Internally, UTC maintains a mail list called the "Unicore" list,
+   which carries traffic related to meetings, technical content of the
+   standard, and so forth.  Members of the list are UTC representatives;
+   employees and staff of member organizations (such as the Research
+   Libraries Group); individual liaisons to and from other standards
+   bodies (such as WG2 and IETF); and invited experts from institutions
+   such as the Library of Congress and some universities.  Subscription
+   to the list for external individuals is subject to "sponsorship" by
+   the corporate officers.
+
+   Unicode, Inc. also maintains a public discussion list called the
+   "Unicode" list.  Subscription is open to anyone, and proceedings of
+   the "Unicode" mail list are publicly archived.  Details are on the
+   Consortium web site under the "Mail Lists" heading.
+
+   Technical proposals for changes to the standard are posted to both of
+   these mail lists on a regular basis.  Discussion on the public list
+   may result in a written proposal being generated for a later UTC
+   meeting.  Technical issues and other standardization "events" of any
+   significance, such as beta releases and availability of draft
+   documents, are announced and then discussed in this public forum,
+   well before standardization is finalized.  From time to time, the UTC
+   also publishes on the Consortium web site "Public Review Issues" to
+   gather feedback and generate discussion of specific proposals whose
+   impact may be unclear, or for which sufficiently broad review may not
+   yet have been brought to the UTC deliberations.
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                      [Page 9]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+   Anyone may make a character encoding or architectural proposal to
+   UTC.  Membership in the organization is not required to submit a
+   proposal.  To be taken seriously, the proposal must be framed in a
+   substantial way, and be accompanied by sufficient documentation to
+   warrant discussion.  Examples of proposals are easily available by
+   following links from the "Proposed Characters" and "Roadmaps"
+   headings on the Unicode web site.  Guidelines for proposals are also
+   available under the heading "Submitting Proposals".
+
+   In general, proposals are publicly aired on the "Unicode" mail list,
+   sometimes for a long period, prior to formal submission.  Generally
+   this is of benefit to the proposer as it tends to reduce the number
+   of times the proposal is sent back for clarification or with requests
+   for additional information.  Once a proposal reaches the stage of
+   being ready for discussion by UTC, the proposer will have received
+   contact through the public mail list with one or more UTC members
+   willing to explain or defend it in a UTC meeting.
+
+10.  Acknowledgements
+
+   Thanks to Mark Davis, Simon Josefsson, and Ken Whistler for their
+   extensive review and feedback on previous versions of this document.
+
+11.  Security Considerations
+
+   This memo describes the operational procedures of an organization;
+   the procedures themselves have no consequences for Internet Security.
+
+12.  Author's Address
+
+   Rick McGowan
+   c/o The Unicode Consortium
+   P.O. Box 391476
+   Mountain View, CA 94039-1476
+   U.S.A.
+
+   Phone:   +1-650-693-3921
+   Web: http://www.unicode.org/
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                     [Page 10]
+
+RFC 3718      Internal Workings of the Unicode Consortium  February 2004
+
+
+13.  Full Copyright Statement
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
+   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78 and
+   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
+
+   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
+   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
+   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
+   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
+   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
+   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
+   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Intellectual Property
+
+   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
+   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
+   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
+   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
+   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
+   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
+   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
+   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
+
+   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
+   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
+   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
+   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
+   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
+   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
+
+   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
+   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
+   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
+   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
+   ipr@ietf.org.
+
+Acknowledgement
+
+   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
+   Internet Society.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+McGowan                      Informational                     [Page 11]
+