From: Keith Packard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Around 22 o'clock on Jun 29, Yu Shao wrote:
> > >Tagging GB18030 fonts as suitable for traditional chinese seems like a
> > >mistake; the glyph forms are more likely simplified, and it would be
> > >
> > Agreed.
> This is reassuring.
No, this is not the case.
Let us use Unicode terms here, because those national standard are
missleading. GB18030 is a PRC standard, but it doesn't means it
is for simplified Chinese. Actually, all those fonts use Unicode
CMAP, so they are really Unicode font.
For Han characters, GB18030 covers CJK Unified Ideographs and
its extension A. GBK covers CJK Unified Ideographs only. Roughly
speaking, CJK Unified Ideographs covers both GB2312 and BIG5 character
set. The simplifed and traditional forms are NOT unified. So
both GBK and GB18030 fonts are suitable for simplified Chinese
and traditional Chinese.
No, the algorithm is not quite right:
if (covers_much_of (gb18030))
font supports simplified Chinese
if (covers_almost_all_of (Big5))
font supports traditional Chinese
font does not support simplified Chinese
For a GB18030 font, since it covers much of GB18030 set, it suports
simplified Chinese. And is also covers almost all of BIG5, so it
supports traditional Chinese too. But now the algorithm excludes it
from simplified Chinese support. The last line is wrong.
Actually, it is better changed to
if (covers_almost_all_of (GB2312))
font supports traditional Chinese
if (covers_almost_all_of (Big5))
font supports traditional Chinese
Regards,
Yao Zhang
_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
