Re: Still can't work out whats a "canonical decomp" vs a "compatibility decomp"

From: John Cowan (
Date: Wed May 07 2003 - 17:56:13 EDT

  • Next message: Sarasvati: "Re: Discussion/Notices re: fonts"

    Asmus Freytag scripsit:

    > Actually, that describes the ideal - in the historic process of creating
    > and maintaining these decompositions, that ideal has been compromised.

    Fair enough. But it does describe what the original poster wanted to know
    about: the *purpose* of having two different decomposition systems.

    > The canonical decompositions were applied to CJK compatibility characters,
    > essentially negating their purpose, and causing big practical problems in
    > all environments where they are used. It's arguable that they should have
    > been made compatibility decompositions.

    They are a mixed lot, though; the Korean ones on the BMP are really, really
    just clones, AFAIU.

    In politics, obedience and support      John Cowan <>
    are the same thing.  --Hannah Arendt

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 07 2003 - 18:44:43 EDT