[Neobrahmigp] IP review of Gujarati LGR proposal v3.5

[Sarmad Hussain]

Dear Akshat, NBGP members,

 

Please find below the review of the Gujarati LGR proposal by the IP members.

 

Please let us know if you have any queries.  We look forward to your final review.

 

Regards,
Sarmad

  _____  

To: Neo-Brahmi Generation Panel

From: Integration Panel

 

The Integration Panel has reviewed the 20181205 draft of the Gujarati LGR proposal.

 

Findings:

 

DOC

There were no changes made to the specification for Gujarati, except minor editorial touches in the DOCx file. At this point, there are a few small editorial issues for the DOCx: 

 

(D1) p. 7 - the same language appears to be spelled Kacchi and Kachhi --- the second spelling (in the list) appears in error.

 

(D2) in the Webography item 3

         Wikipedia, “Gujarati language” ---> Gujarati (Unicode block)

 

XML

There are two small editorial issues in the XML:

(X1) 

permitted as per the [MSR] 



=>
permitted as per the [MSR-3] 

 

The <description> uses [MSR] but defines [MSR-3] as the reference. This is flagged by the IP's HTML converter tool, hence the red color for the letters MSR. (When doing the fix, also remove the definite article which should not be used when a specific version is referenced)

 

(X2) Like all LGRs at this stage, the following TBDs in the <description> need to be replaced by actual values during publication:

[Proposal]

NeoBrahmi Generation Panel, "Proposal for a Gujarati Script Root Zone Label Generation Ruleset (LGR)" [Date TBD] [URL TBD]

 

TXT

The IP reviewed the provided test file and finds the expected dispositions.

 

Google Doc

The IP also reviewed the disposition of comments found in

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CLKdJBTNDcC_sFFs5s0a_Bk0zQUER2BIruYuyCNgkAw/edit# [docs.google.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1CLKdJBTNDcC-5FsFFs5s0a-5FBk0zQUER2BIruYuyCNgkAw_edit-23&d=DwMDaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=hTZsuB_r-jNLcATOhyeVvjObk4seY8bnSjUmAPHQSqk&s=6RLxJSVPdpry0ewHUu2fpWzqoXHI7_w9d9TOu5R8TP8&e=> 

in which the GP notes the conclusion that no further actions are contemplated by the GP and gives a reason for that decision.

 

Therefore, the IP concludes that all comments appear to have been taken into account. It is assumed by the IP that this document or something substantially similar will be made public as part of the response to Public Comments.

 

Conclusion

The IP requests the GP to address the identified editorial issues before finalizing the submission.

  _____  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/neobrahmigp/attachments/20190122/858522a5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5026 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/neobrahmigp/attachments/20190122/858522a5/smime.p7s>