Hi, Suzuki-san. Thank you for reply. > At present, I have no objection to add halfwidth katakana > to ideographic-class in UAX#14, but I'm unfamiliar with the > (negative) impact caused by the lack of halfwidth katakana > in it. Could you tell me if you know anything?
Since half-width katakana isn't ID, it isn't break line like full-wdith katakana. This is a sample for line break of half-width katakana. (There is good sample by web browser implementation) http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/layout/reftests/line-breaking/ja-3.html Firefox and IE11 define half-width katakana as ID. The line break of half-width katakana is same as full-width katakana. Chrome doesn't define it as ID. Half-width katakana isn't line break per character. Although I read JIS X 4051, it doesn't define that half-width katakana and full-width katakana are differently. > I guess, the inclusion or exclusion in other classes, like, > AI, AL, CJ, JL, JV, JT, SA might be quite important to realize > the appropriate line breaking, but the inclusion or exclusion > in ID-class does not seem to be important. If the inclusion > in ID-class is important, more characters (e.g. Bopomofo) > should be considered for full coverage. How do you think of? My discussion is why half-width katanaka character isn't same class of full-width katakana character. In this case, half-width katakana originally defines as AL at current spec. So when moving to ID, break rule is strongly changed. (non-break -> break before or after). -- Makoto On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:14 PM, suzuki toshiya <mpsuz...@hiroshima-u.ac.jp> wrote: > Kato-san, > > At present, I have no objection to add halfwidth katakana > to ideographic-class in UAX#14, but I'm unfamiliar with the > (negative) impact caused by the lack of halfwidth katakana > in it. Could you tell me if you know anything? > > I guess, the inclusion or exclusion in other classes, like, > AI, AL, CJ, JL, JV, JT, SA might be quite important to realize > the appropriate line breaking, but the inclusion or exclusion > in ID-class does not seem to be important. If the inclusion > in ID-class is important, more characters (e.g. Bopomofo) > should be considered for full coverage. How do you think of? > > Regards, > mpsuzuki > > Makoto Kato wrote: >> Hi. >> >> http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr14/proposed.html#ID defines Ideographic >> (ID). Although full-width katakana is included in ID, half-width >> katakana (U+FF66 and U+FF71-U+FF9D) isn't. Why? >> >> Also, Conditional Japanese Starter (CJ, >> http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr14/proposed.html#CJ) considers >> half-width variants such as half-width katakana letter small a. >> >> >> -- Makoto