>Furthermore, the IRG has been, and still is, busy adding Han variants >to encode. I cannot analyse their proposals, so I cannot tell what >is variant of what. If you really want a particular variant, go look >in extension B, or in the upcoming extension C...
These may be difficult to use as font file formats, such as true type, have a fixed ucs-2 internal encoding in the cmap, so they have difficulty representing beyond-bmp characters. Does anybody here have a system where beyond-BMP glyphs work well with? (Input Servers, font display, titlebars, etc) >Also lurking in the >wings are "variant selectors", anticipating more variants, but >that they should not be given separate characters, but use >"variant selectors" instead. Finally, the Unicode consortium >has started pondering on "normalisation tailoring", since some >find the canonical mappings of some Han characters "unhelpful". There are no Han variations yet, afaik. I think that for unified characters which have significantly different orthography, there could easily by a pair of non-unified codepoints which were more specific. Thats certainly better that "variant selectors" which are destined to be poorly supported if ever. -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
