The Unicode Consortium Discussion Forum

The Unicode Consortium Discussion Forum

 Forum Home  Unicode Home Page Code Charts Technical Reports FAQ Pages 
 
It is currently Wed Sep 17, 2014 2:32 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 5:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:01 am
Posts: 71
During the JTLF review, it was pointed out that Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19.

From class names, it's quite ambiguous since Hangul is neither Western nor Kanji. But JLREQ tables assumes there are line break opportunities between any two cl-19, and in regards of line break opportunities, Hangul should behave like Latin alphabets.

So our recommendation is to make them cl-27 and U.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:27 pm 
Offline
Unicode Guru

Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:25 pm
Posts: 76
In the Unicode world, linebreaks are driven by UAX#14 and its supporting properties, and EAC has no impact on that.

EAC is primarily about the spacing in lines. I guess the relevant test is in a string mixing kanji and hangul: do you want space to be materialized at the kanji/hangul boundaries or not? Looking at Korean newspapers from last century, I'd say "no space", hence cl-19 seems to be the correct assignment. (and the UTR#50 subclassing takes care of the class name problem).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:01 am
Posts: 71
Thank you for the reply.

First, I remember you wanted to use EAC for Kinsoku line breaking rules. Does that still stand, or is that discarded? Maybe we could think, add where EAC prohibits line breaking to UAX#14. It doesn't matter for this case, but I'd appreciate clarifications for reviewing other classes.

Second, for spacing I think you mean 1/4em space, right? 1/4em space between Kanji and alphabets is optional, some styles do not prefer to insert, and newspaper in general do not insert the space.

For materials that inserts space between Kanji and alphabets, I think the space should be inserted between Kanji and Hangul as well.

Is this agreeable?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:07 pm
Posts: 5
Sorry for possible interference...
kojiishi wrote:
From class names, it's quite ambiguous since Hangul is neither Western nor Kanji. But JLREQ tables assumes there are line break opportunities between any two cl-19, and in regards of line break opportunities, Hangul should behave like Latin alphabets.

Ttuieo-sseugi (flowed writing) is usually used in modern hangul texts (wakachi-gaki of Japanese is similar method). However, segments separated by this method themselves are often broken at right (bottom, in vertical texts) end of lines. Reading hangul texts, it is difficult to find a page without such breaking, at least in my very limited experiences. So my question is --- what kind of commonly accepted layout rules of hangul is this proposal based on?

Additional question: amount of spacing by ttuieo-sseugi in hangul texts seems to be differ from one of space (cl-26) by JLREQ: mostly half to full em in vertical and half em or so in horizontal. How about a new class for hangul that is neither cl-19 nor cl-27?
emuller wrote:
Looking at Korean newspapers from last century, I'd say "no space", hence cl-19 seems to be the correct assignment.

I agree to Muller-san on spacing behavior. I investigated figures in a book on history of advertisement industry in Korea thru 20ct.

And for informations, horizontal hangul printings in current days seem to place no spaces in the segments with mixed character types, for example "2012년에" (at year 2012). The scope of this TR may be limited to vertical layout, though.


Last edited by sikeda on Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:01 am
Posts: 71
sikeda wrote:
Additional question: amount of spacing by ttuieo-sseugi in hangul texts seems to be differ from one of space (cl-26) by JLREQ: mostly half to full em in vertical and half em or so in horizontal. How about a new class for hangul that is neither cl-19 nor cl-27?

I agree. With our current knowledge, I think that'd be the best way to go.
sikeda wrote:
emuller wrote:
Looking at Korean newspapers from last century, I'd say "no space", hence cl-19 seems to be the correct assignment.

I agree to Muller-san on spacing behavior. I investigated figures in a book on history of advertisement industry in Korea thru 20ct.

And for informations, horizontal hangul printings in current days seem to place no spaces in the segments with mixed character types, for example "2012년에" (at year 2012). The scope of this TR may be limited to vertical layout, though.

I don't have many materials to investigate, but I want to make sure we all understand that 1/4em space between alphabets and native is:
  • is a style preference even in Japanese, so some may have it while others may not.
  • I'm not 100% sure about this but it's probably Japanese-specific style. MS Word has the switch, which, IIRC, is off for Korean version of Word.
  • If Hangul appears within Japanese text, author would insert 1/4em space if other parts of the publication insert 1/4em between Kanji and Latin letters.
That said, we probably need another class as sikeda-san suggested, and changing the default spacing table within apps by language settings or user preferences can achieve the expected results.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:01 am
Posts: 71
I forgot to add that a team in Korea is currently working on KLREQ -- Korean version of layout requirements. It might help to create the spacing table for Korean, and until then, giving Hangul class would be good I think.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 8:16 pm 
Offline
Unicode Guru

Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:25 pm
Posts: 76
kojiishi wrote:
First, I remember you wanted to use EAC for Kinsoku line breaking rules. Does that still stand, or is that discarded?


Actually, I never wanted to use EAC for line breaking; UAX#14 (and the lb property) is the right tool, IMO. EAC should be only for driving mojikumi.

Quote:
Second, for spacing I think you mean 1/4em space, right? 1/4em space between Kanji and alphabets is optional, some styles do not prefer to insert, and newspaper in general do not insert the space.


Yes I do. I am aware that not all house rules insert that aki. You can rephrase my question as "in those mojikumi settings where kanji/alphabetical has a different aki than kanji/kanji, how is the kanji/hangul aki?" The point is to figure out if Hangul works more like Kanji or more likt alphabetical.

Quote:
How about a new class for hangul that is neither cl-19 nor cl-27?


Well, 19.3 is neither 19 nor 27, so we are there :D . I am not just being facetious here; I have used a "subclass" notation for now, mostly to not create a disconnect with JLREQ during the drafting of UTR#50, and I expected some shuffling a bit later in the process; looks like now is the time. But a question first:


I think that we will find Hangul characters in three situations:

- in the context of Japanese texts
- in older Korean texts, which follow mostly Japanese-style typography (~ vertical texts, still a fair amount of kanji intermixed, mostly on a 1em grid, mojikumi spacing on the line)
- more recent Korean texts, which follow mostly a Western-style typography (~ horizontal, little Kanji, justification on U+0020 ‘ ’ SPACE only)

In Japanese texts, are they treated essentially as cl-19, or are they treated as cl-27 (for the spacing only, we know the orientation is upright).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hangul should be cl-27, not cl-19
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 5:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:01 am
Posts: 71
emuller wrote:
I think that we will find Hangul characters in three situations:

- in the context of Japanese texts
- in older Korean texts, which follow mostly Japanese-style typography (~ vertical texts, still a fair amount of kanji intermixed, mostly on a 1em grid, mojikumi spacing on the line)
- more recent Korean texts, which follow mostly a Western-style typography (~ horizontal, little Kanji, justification on U+0020 ‘ ’ SPACE only)

In Japanese texts, are they treated essentially as cl-19, or are they treated as cl-27 (for the spacing only, we know the orientation is upright).

When they appear within Japanese texts, they're cl-27.

I don't have good answers when they appear in older/recent Korean texts, we need to ask someone else, or wait for KLREQ.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


Quick-mod tools:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Template made by DEVPPL.com