On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> In Unicode, CJK characters with same meaning and similar shape is
> unified. For example, U+9AA8 (ideograph 'bone') unifies 0x3947 from
> GB2312 (Mainland China), 0x586C from CNS11643-1 (Taiwan), 0x397C from
> JISX0208 (Japan), and 0x4D69 from KSX1001 (Korea). However, though
> these character share the common origin, today they have different
> shape and CJK people cannot tolerate. Note that these all characters
> are not historic but used for daily use. Also note that any future
> extention cannot fix this problem because already determined codepoint
> of Unicode will not be changed in future. (And more, if it were
> changed, confusion will occur.)
Are these differences any more significant than the differences between
the following forms of Latin
* Roman
* Italic
* Fraktur
* Black Letter
* Handwriting-of-Markus-Kuhn-When-Quite-Drunk (which is registed to be
-mk3- I think in my registry of ADD_STYLE_NAME entries).
Compare also the polish form of acute, which many insist is a different
accent entirely.
The answer is a definite "no".
Unicode encodes characters, not glyphs. The line has to be drawn
somewhere. You argument is an old one, and sadly mainly one that is used
to justify fear of change.
--
Robert Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
