Unicode is the solution. Again

Looking at uecd today. Take a look at 4.2, a textual definition of a 'word which stands alone'. I was OK trying to build up a regex until I came to the definition of 'dash'. Up in the Unicode, u2010 to u2014. There are quite a variety of 'dashes'. Unfortunately, the uebc team seem unaware of the need for specificity when talking about glyphs. The team know all about text to braille translation, but make it harder by referring to well known terms which are woolly when viewed through a Unicode perspective. They are at least aware of it, and their time spans are enormous compared to W3C, quite possibly even compared to the ISO processes. The can genuinely say that Unicode has moved on since they started!

At least at the symbols page they have used code points. Just need to take that rigour over into the rest of the working group outputs.

I'd never seen the need for the Unicode code point definitions (why are they in upper case?) until now. Now I can see a use case for using exactly the phrase used in the spec.