Hi, At Wed, 9 Jan 2002 16:00:27 +0100, Pablo Saratxaga wrote:
> > Not true. I am a native Japanese speaker. There are some characters > > whose Japanese version is very basic (and elementary school student > > can read) while I cannot read Chinese version. > > But are those unified? > Have you an example of a unified one in such case? Yes, unified. The most famous example is U+76F4. I'd like to show an image but I cannot find.... Images are not available at: http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=76f4 There are many characters which have "walk" radical. Japanese "walk" radical has (usually) one "dot" (note that "dot" is a term of Japanese calligraphy to tell element of Kanji characters, like "vertical stroke", "horizonal stroke", "right brush", "left brush", and "leap", though my English translation may be wrong) while traditional-Chinese and Korean "walk" radical has two "dots". Since there are a little number of Japanese characters which use "walk" radical with two "dots" (i.e., in Japan, some characters has two dots and many others has one dot), the number of "dots" is important for Japanese. However, they are unified. (In this case, Japanese people kan reed iT, just giv!ng a phunNy empResion.) (U+2ECC ... "walk" radical with one dot, U+2ECD ... "walk" radical with two dots. There are another variant of U+2ECE which is not used in Japan. Though these radicals are not unified, characters with these "walk" variants are unified.) There are many radicals which have similar problems. > > Many older Japanese people can read traditional-Chinese style, because > > Japanese people used to use the style until about 1950. > > But those are not unified. > Those that have two different codepoints in japanese encodings are two > different ones in unicode too. Since usage of t-C style characters is exceptional in modern Japanese (in case of person's family names and place names, and few others), not many t-C style characters are encoded in Japanese character sets. > Maybe I'm missing something and there are indeed some characters that > are problematic; however I haven't encountered none. On the other side > I agree that my knowledge of kanji must be far below yours, so maybe I > just happen to not know the ones that are problematic (among others I don't > know either, of course). > > > Believe me, I read tens of ads every day (on TV and on newspapers) > > because I live in Japan. (Sometimes Japanese ads may use very difficult > > character which nobody can read. The purpose is just to give an > > authorized or intelligent impression.) > > I once saw a picture of an ad that have the kanji for "buy" (I think, don't > recall exactly) with its "shell" radical replaced by a real picture of > a real shell; if it wasn't told in the text below the image what it was > supposed to be I wouldn't had discovered it, for sure. Real "shell" image for "shell" radical? It is just an art, not a character, at least for any levels of computer text processing. Of course it is not "traditional-Chinese" style. --- Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.or.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/linux-utf8/
