----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Asmus Freytag" <email@example.com>
À : "Unicode List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc : <email@example.com>
Envoyé : Friday, July 21, 2000 12:10 PM
Objet : RE: 127 strokes beyond the radical?!
>Patrick Andries wrote:
> > De : <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > > On page 876, the character U+6B8B is listed as being
> > > 127 strokes beyond the radical. I'd say it's more
> > > like 6 strokes beyond the radical.
> > I believe it to be 5 strokes and it is already listed under
> > radical + 5 strokes.
> [Asmus] If you read the book, it's listed under 6, not 5.
I stand corrected for having wrongly excluded the + 6 form. But I wonder if
I'm, however, wrong to suggest the +5 form ? Isn't U+6B8B the last
ideograph in the radical + 5 and radical + 6 lists on page 876 of TUS 3.0 ?
It is true that for TUS 2.0, page 8-23, U+6B8B seems only to be listed under
radical+6 but with a radical+5 glyph...
I have checked ISO/CEI 10646-1:2000 and it looks like the +5 strokes form is
a simplified Chinese form (G-Hanzi) [2 horizontal strokes in the "suffix"]
and the +6 strokes form [3 horizontal strokes in the "suffix"] is used in
Japan, Korea and Vietnam.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:06 EDT