Hi,
> CJK (Chinese, Jap, Korean) are much more complex, from what I've read.
> Mainly because they involve pictures as well as phoenetics. It's just
> that a lot of effort has been spent on those languages.
Thanx arun for the info. I didn't know almost every point you
mentioned. But about cjk and indian scripts, AFAIK the CJK characters are
not formed in the complex way ours are. They have a very large number of
symbols/characters, but there is no mechanism of combining primitives to
form the actual characters/glyphs as our scripts do. Am I correct?
In that supporting cjk boils down to having those thousands of
symbols encoded. Where as supporting indian scripts is much more complex
due to the way our scripts modify/merge/manipulate the individual
characters while writing..
Regards,
Kedar.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on this and other Linux India mailing lists check out
http://lists.linux-india.org/
