I can announce that Bruno Haible and Gaspar Sinai agreed on the following UNOFFICIAL JISX0213 maps:
http://www.yudit.org/MAPPINGS/JISX0213-1.TXT http://www.yudit.org/MAPPINGS/JISX0213-2.TXT Bruno, plese check them once again against yours. Still, they may not be perfect, and they do not solve all the problems. *Please* read http://www.yudit.org/MAPPINGS/JISX0213.ERR.TXT that was generated by recmat.pl and it shows the known problems. I would like to ask Markus Kuhn to take over the maps. I hope they will serve good purpose. Also, I would like David Starner to ask about the known issues mentioned in JISX0213.ERR.TXT at a Unicode Consortium forum if he thinks it is appropriate. http://www.yudit.org/download/ yudit-2.6.beta2.tar.gz has these maps built-in already. Thank you, gaspar PS: That was quick - Linux rulez ;) On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Bruno Haible wrote: > Gaspar Sinai writes: > > > > 555c555 > > > < 0x12678 0x30D7 > > > --- > > > > 0x12678 0x31F7 0x309A > > > If we use 0x30D7 we will clash with: > > > > Table 5 row 4 column 8 > > 0x8376 0x2557 0x30D7 # 1-5-55 (55 == 0x37) > > Yes, this character is a 'small' variant of 0x30D7. I concede. Let's > use 0x31F7 0x309A. It will be the task of the display engine to > position the small circle at the right position. > > > But what shall we do with 0x12B65 0xFFFD? > > Maybe another symbol added to Unicode Yi radicals? > > Can you move this issue to the unicode.org mailing list? > > > 7950c7951 > > < 0x17624 0xFA3E > > --- > > > 0x17624 0x69EA > > You are right. Let's use 0x69EA here. Also can you tell the > unicode.org people to add this one to Unihan.txt? > > Bruno > -- > Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels > Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/ > > -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
