Editorial: use unicode name/code for currencies in note

[marcoscaceres]

Begins to address w3c/i18n-activity#1044

---

Preview | Diff

[ianbjacobs]

Hi @marcoscaceres,

It feels to me like we should review and harmonize the guidance in
this section. As written I think there are some contradictions between
the ISO4217 and non-ISO sections.

Here's an overall flow (with some questions inline). Let me know what you think.

INPUT:

1. An [[ISO4217]] well-formed 3-letter
   alphabetic code (i.e., the numeric codes are not supported).

2. Current implementations also allow the use of well-formed
   currency codes that are not part of the official [[ISO4217]] list
   (e.g., XBT, XRP, etc.).

3. In more detail: User agents implementing this specification
   enforce [[ISO4217]]'s 3-letter codes format via ECMAScript’s isWellFormedCurrencyCode
   abstract operation, which is invoked as part of the check and
   canonicalize amount algorithm. When a code does not adhere to
   the [[ISO4217]] defined format, a {{RangeError}} is thrown.

DISPLAY:

1. Browsers that display the 3-letter currency codes generally do so
   using uppercase.

2. User agents MAY format the currency to adhere to OS
   conventions (e.g., for localization purposes).

   OBSERVATION: This one overrides the points below so I am suggesting
   to put it first.

3. Currency symbols

   • Browsers MAY display a currency symbol instead of a currency code.
     (e.g., "USD" is shown as U+0024 Dollar Sign ($), "GBP" is U+00A3
     Pound Sign (£), and the non-standard "XBT" could be
     shown as U+0243 Latin Capital Letter B with Stroke (Ƀ))

   • However, the meaning of currency symbols may be ambiguous, so
     user agents SHOULD display currency codes.

     QUESTION: Should they only do that when there is ambiguity?
     QUESTION: Should they not display the currency symbol at all,
     or should they display the currency code along with the
     symbol?

   • The set of combinations of currency code for which localized
     currency symbols are available is implementation dependent.

   • When a currency symbol is not available, user agent MAY
     MAY use U+00A4 (¤).

ADDITIONAL NOTES:

• Efforts are underway at ISO to account for digital currencies,
  which may result in an update to the [[ISO4217]] registry or an
  entirely new registry. The community expects this will resolve
  ambiguities that have crept in through the use of non-standard
  3-letter codes; for example, does "BTC" refer to Bitcoin or to a
  future Bhutan currency? At the time of publication, it remains
  unclear what form this evolution will take, or even the time frame
  in which the work will be completed. The W3C Web Payments Working
  Group is liaising with ISO so that, in the future, revisions to
  this specification remain compatible with relevant ISO registries.

[marcoscaceres]

Browsers MAY display a currency symbol instead of a currency code.

We probably don't want to recommend this at all.

QUESTION: Should they only do that when there is ambiguity?

No, they SHOULD always do it - otherwise it would get really confusing.

QUESTION: Should they not display the currency symbol at all,
or should they display the currency code along with the
symbol?

That's a call for UX team - and it may be locale dependent. Thus, it's not our (the WG's/Spec's) call. We can only point out what the pitfalls are (the note).

The additional note seems good. I'll update.

[marcoscaceres]

The additional note seems good. I'll update.

Never mind :) it's the same.

[marcoscaceres]

Browsers that display the 3-letter currency codes generally do so using uppercase.

Note that we only say that the canonical form as it relates to the currency member. We don't say anything about how it should be shown: that's a UA/OS decision, not a spec decision.

[marcoscaceres]

@ianbjacobs, rereading you comments, and questions aside, I think the updated prose addresses your comments... or at least, can you help me understand more specifically where it doesn't.

I think there might be a misunderstanding in that there are no "ISO4217 and non-ISO sections." Let me clarify: any three letter combination is valid irrespective of ISO4217, as isWellFormedCurrencyCode doesn't care if a currency code is ISO4217 or not. Thus, saying "{"currency": "XXX"}" or "{"currency": "XBT"}" for that matter is totally valid, even though it's not part of ISO4217.

[ianbjacobs]

Hi @marcoscaceres,

At the 15 April 2021 WPWG call it was suggested to add an example of a 2-character currency symbol (just to make the point that not all currency symbols are single Unicode characters). One suggestion was to use PLN / zł.

A concrete editorial proposal is to change

(e.g., "USD" is shown as U+0024 Dollar Sign ($), "GBP" is U+00A3 Pound Sign (£), and the non-standard "XBT" could be shown as U+0243 Latin Capital Letter B with Stroke (Ƀ)).

to

(e.g., "USD" is shown as U+0024 Dollar Sign ($), "GBP" is shown as U+00A3 Pound Sign (£), "PLN" is shown as U+007A U+0142 Złoty (zł), and the non-standard "XBT" could be shown as U+0243 Latin Capital Letter B with Stroke (Ƀ)).

cc @aphillips, @r12a

[marcoscaceres]

Updated spec to include Złoty.