As well how Chinese/Japanese post offices handle addresses written with sinograms for personal names ? Is the expanded IDS form acceptable for them, or do they require using Romanized addresses, or phonetic approximations (Bopomofo in China, Kanas in Japan, Hangul in Korea) ?
2018-03-09 2:17 GMT+01:00 Philippe Verdy <verd...@wanadoo.fr>: > This still leaves the question about how to write personal names ! > IDS alone cannot represent them without enabling some "reasonable" > ligaturing (they don't have to match the exact strokes variants for optimal > placement, or with all possible simplifications). > I'm curious to know how China, Taiwan, Singapore or Japan handle this (for > official records or in banks): like our personal signatures (as digital > images), and then using a simplified official record (including the > registration of romanized names)? > > 2018-03-09 0:06 GMT+01:00 Richard Wordingham via Unicode < > unicode@unicode.org>: > >> On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 09:42:38 +0800 >> via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org> wrote: >> >> > to the best of my knowledge virtually no new characters used just for >> > names are under consideration, all the ones that are under >> > consideration are from before this century. >> >> What I was interested in was the rate of generation of new >> CJK characters in general, not just those for names. I appreciate that >> encoding is dominated by the backlog of older characters. >> >> Richard. >> > >