At 00/04/27 02:26 -0800, NAOI Yasushi wrote:
>At 8:12 PM -0800 00.4.26, Mark Davis wrote:
>I can't understand what the term "the same abstract shape" means. If six
>characters in Figure 10-4 "would normaly be subject to unification" then:
>
>o Do U+50C9 and U+91D1 have the same abstract shape?
>o DO U+5202 and U+5204 have the same abstract shape?
>
>I can't believe that. I agree these six Kanji characters are cognate, I
>however think U+50C9 and U+91D1
As far as I know, these are definitely not cognate.
>(U+5202 and U+5204) are not cognate and
>not similar at all.
I'm not familliar enough with them, and don't have
references handy.
At least the first case seems to suggest that of the six Kanji
in Fig. 10-4, the last one might be removed. There are other
rules that would prevent it's unification, too.
But please note that if two characters A and B differ
only in components C and D, and C and D are considered
non-cognate or different in abstract shape, this doesn't
automatically mean that A and B are considered to be
different in abstract shape.
There are quite some examples where a difference in a simple
character is important, but if that appears as a component,
the difference becomes less relevant. The most famous case
(usually explained as non-cognate, not as a difference
in abstract shape) is U+571F vs. U+58EB.
Regards, Martin.
ard
including phony codepoints for the things not yet in 10646/Unicode
is creating some waves in Japan, too. If you read Japanese, please
e.g. have a look at:
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/internet/www/column/ogata/
If the Unicode consortium and WG2 do a good job here, working
fast and according to clear guidelines and making public what
they do, then they have a good chance of making the word 'Unicode'
much more acceptable in Japan.
>It doesn't matter that many of those
>participating in the excellent work done by the IRG are Japanese - those
>who oppose Unicode consider these hard-working experts as some sort of
>linguiistic/encoding traitors.
There is indeed some split. People with a lot of knowledge in Kanji
and their history have usually much less problems accepting the
unification than technical people who have in many cases suffered
when they had to learn Kanji in school (but maybe have excelled
at Math,...).
Regards, Martin.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT