On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Edward Cherlin wrote: > > No single font can, and that's why these language tags have been added > > to Unicode 3.2. > > Nonsense. There are numerous fonts covering the entire CJK Unified Ideographs > block of Unicode, and have been some since MS Arial Unicode in the time of > Unicode 1.0. This includes Big5 for Traditional Chinese, GB3212 for > Simplified Chinese, the JIS standards for Japanese, and KSC-5601 for Korean, > and a good deal more. > > The results of using these fonts are ugly, but no worse than using the Latin > alphabet sections of Chinese and Japanese fonts for English. Since I am > creating Unicode plain-text documents that combine Chinese, Korean, and > Japanese, I have some experience in using such fonts. When I can, I use > culturally-appropriate fonts for each language and country. When I can't, I > manage, and so do my readers.
For whatever my comment may be worth, I have to agree with Mr. Cherlin 100%. If a person happens to know traditional Chinese, simplified Chinese, and Japanese, then he or she most likely has enough familiarity with the various glyph variants that it's nothing more than a little aesthetic nuisance if the font is not quite the best. It's only a small fraction of all the ideographs that have true culturally distinct glyph variants. -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
