Re: CJK Unified Ideographs Range

From: Andrew C. West (
Date: Thu Feb 20 2003 - 04:48:29 EST

  • Next message: Werner LEMBERG: "Re: [OpenType] PS glyph `phi' vs `phi1'"

    On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 01:39:58 -0800 (PST), Kenneth Whistler wrote:

    > TYPE 11: Block ranges match in Unicode and 10646, for
    > blocks with generated character names, but NamesList.txt
    > shows a mismatched range.
    > 4E00 CJK Unified Ideographs 9FA5
    > 4E00..9FFF; CJK Unified Ideographs
    > Analysis: The range distinction in NamesList.txt is deliberate,
    > to enable calculation of the cutoff point in the charts,
    > where there are no actual character name entries in NamesList.txt
    > to drive this.
    > Suggested resolution: No action.

    Ken, thanks for the prompt reply - I'm glad that this discrepancy has been noted
    by Unicode. Maybe what I'm really trying to ask is, if sometime in the future we
    start to run out of space in the BMP, could U+9FB0 through U+9FFF be
    reallocated to some new script, or is the allocation of these 80 codepoints to
    the CJK block permanent and irrevocable ?



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 20 2003 - 05:32:20 EST