I'm currently working on a CCCII->CNS mapping table by printing out
CCCII and CNS glyphs side by side (I'll probably post this on a server
in case someone is interested -- expect a set of *large* PS files).
As a starting point, I use Christian Wittern's mapping data from his
cefdb database of the kanjibas project.
The used fonts are the CCCII bitmaps from
ftp://ftp.ntu.edu.tw/Chinese/CCDB (the newest bitmap files are dated
Feb 25th, 1993), converted to a large BDF font (cccii64.bdf) by
Yasuoka Koichi (which I've eventually converted into a set of fonts in
HBF format), and the CNS bitmaps from ftp.ifcss.org (cns40-[1-7].hbf,
dated from March 4th, 1994).
My questions: are these bitmap fonts normative? A quick check with
the ISO character set registry shows that the CNS fonts look
identically, but what about CCCII? I know that a lot of glyphs are
waiting for being scanned in (due to lack of founding and interest),
so it is incomplete unfortunately. But have the glyphs in these
bitmap fonts been checked for correctness? Are there newer/better
bitmaps resp. mapping tables available for CCCII? AFAIK, simplified
Chinese, Korean, and Japanese glyphs should be incorporated too but I
have no data...
PS: CCCII is a collection of CJK glyphs *with glyph variants*, thus a
1-1 mapping to Unicode isn't possible (and not very useful too);
the CCCII fonts contain about 74000 glyphs, the CNS fonts about
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:44 EDT