At 21:53 08/02/2001 +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
>I insist that using a unified font for Han ideographs is wrong.
>I wrote it many times. Font must be changed according to the
>language of the (plain) text. Did IRG insist that unified font
>can be used for multilingual text? If yes, please show me the
>sentence. I'll write again. DON'T SHOW ME THE SENTENCE OF HAN
>UNIFICATION ITSELF. It cannot be an evidence that IRG think unified
>font may be used for multilingual text.
thanks for the clarification of your thinking.
My quite personal and uninformed opinion is that the people of the Unicode
Consortium (and the IRG?) think plain text is wrong.
That it is a historical dinosaur that one should not bend forward-looking
standards to make allowance for.
The language tags of plane 14 (and here I am NOT uninformed) was their
attempt to find something that could be claimed to solve the problem, yet
be so thoroughly impractical for common usage that plaintext users would
come to their senses and switch to either out-of-band data (language
negotiation) or markup (like HTML/XML).
Years of debate has failed to come up with a better solution.
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+47 41 44 29 94
Personal email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
