Frank Tang wrote:
>0xA3BB 0x02D9 # DOT ABOVE (Mandarin Chinese light tone)
>0xA3BC 0x02C9 # MODIFIER LETTER MACRON (Mandarin Chinese first tone)
>0xA3BD 0x02CA # MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT (Mandarin Chinese second
>0xA3BE 0x02C7 # CARON (Mandarin Chinese third tone)
>0xA3BF 0x02CB # MODIFIER LETTER GRAVE ACCENT (Mandarin Chinese fourth
>02C7;CARON;...;Mandarin Chinese third tone;;;
>02C8;MODIFIER LETTER VERTICAL LINE;...
>02C9;MODIFIER LETTER MACRON;...;Mandarin Chinese first tone;;;
>02CA;MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT;...;Mandarin Chinese second tone;;;
>02D9;DOT ABOVE;...;Mandarin Chinese light tone;;;
>302A;IDEOGRAPHIC LEVEL TONE MARK;...
>302B;IDEOGRAPHIC RISING TONE MARK;...
>302C;IDEOGRAPHIC DEPARTING TONE MARK;...
>302D;IDEOGRAPHIC ENTERING TONE MARK;...
Are these mappings correct? I always thought that pinyin and bopomofo used
the same marks for tones.
My personal list for bopomofo tones would be this:
* 1st: U+0304 (COMBINING MACRON)
* 2nd: U+0301 (COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT)
* 3rd: U+030C (COMBINING CARON)
* 4th: U+0300 (COMBINING GRAVE ACCENT)
* light: U+0307 (COMBINING DOT ABOVE)
It is the same list that I would use for pinyin, apart the light tone, that
in pinyin is a small circle:
* light: U+030A (COMBINING RING ABOVE)
(There is also another difference: the mark for the light tone is normally
dropped in pinyin, while bopomofo often drops the mark for 1st tone).
What is wrong with this list? Why did Unicode choose spacing marks for
Bopomofo tones in the Big-5 table?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT