Hi,
At Sat, 3 Feb 2001 15:27:21 -0500 (EST),
Thomas Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the vast majority of Japanese users, there is no issue, since they
> will be using Japanese (language) exclusively, and can use a Japanese
> font. The problem is with Japanese users who are dealing with
> multilingual texts and want to make an artificial segregation based on
> some unclear criteria (country? language? time period? character set?).
Using Japanese font is a retrogression into past. Japanese people use
Japanese version of softwares with special Japanization patch and
were bothered maintaining such patches and configuring their environment.
Yes, RedHat and Microsoft can develop separate Japanese version of their
OSes. These OSes have special extension to deal with multibyte languages,
Japanese fonts, and so on. However, don't you think this is against
Unicode's ideal? Need of Japanese font denies the advantage of Unicode.
Then why should we migrate into Unicode though the migration needs
some costs? And more, community-based project like FreeBSD, Debian,
and so on cannot take such localization way.
I am a Debian developer and Debian aims to develop a single distribution
which can be used all over the world. All users have to do should be
to set their LANG variable properly. Using Japanese font is against
this goal.
I again and again and again write that too much Han Unification is like
confusing Latin and Greek characters. It is NOT glyph problem.
> What I'd like to ask is, when one studies Chinese history and literature
> at a Japanese school, do people feel they must go get a "Chinese font" to
> do their assignments and papers? Do the dictionaries and reference works
> they consult that quote Chinese passages have those printed in a "Chinese
> font"?
Yes, of course.
---
Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://surfchem0.riken.go.jp/~kubota/
"Introduction to I18N"
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/intro-i18n/
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
