Date: Sun Nov 25 2007 - 20:04:08 CST
Quoting suzuki toshiya <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> Dear Sirs,
> Although I sent my comment for PRI #108 via web reporting form,
> here I send CC for anybody interested in.
Since pri108 has been raised on the mailing list. It is worth
mentioning regarding pri108 there are problems raised by decisions at
the Hangzhou WG2 in September and IRG #29. To allow for informed
discussion I also 'CC' a commnet of mine, also submitted via web
To Unicode and Adobe,
during the public review period it has become very clear that some of
the suggested sequences in pri108 are incorrect, and that to continue
with pri108 in it's present form would lead to immediate problems.
Most accute is the problem of CID+14089 which in FPAMD5 is proposed
to be encoded at U+9FC4 (see 02n3982.zip fpdam5-all.pdf page 5 ) but
in the adobe IVes is U+6881 vs018.
Even if this problem is resolved a further adobe 10 characters are in
http://www.cse.cuhk.edu.hk/~irg/irg/irg29/IRGN1380_UNC.pdf a list of
254 characters fast tracted by the IRG which a verdict by the IRG
within the next 12 months.
2 characters approved for submission to the IRG by the UTC at the
request of Adobe, namely:-
CID+13866 pri108 U+52E2 vs 18 is UTC00857 (IRGN1380 #022)
CID+20240 pri108 U+943A vs 18 is UTC00872 (IRGN1380 #207) (also has
And a further 8 or 9 characters submitted by Japan
CID+13780 pri108 U+4ECA vs18 JH-004890 (IRGN1380 #008)
CID+20114 pri108 U+5EA7 vs18 JH-IB1783 (IRGN1380 #070)
CID+20117 pri108 U+5FA1 vs18 JH-IB0680 (IRGN1380 #074)
CID+14064 pri108 U+687A vs18 JH-JTB314 (IRGN1380 #095)
CID+13723/4 pri108 U+2363A vs18/9 JH-IB2148 (IRGN1380 #099)*
CID+15393 pri108 U+2363A vs18 JH-JTC0EB (IRGN1380 #100)*
CID+20150 pri108 U+6A9C vs18 JH-JTB398 (IRGN1380 #102)
CID+20201 pri108 U+83DF vs18 JH-JTB989 (IRGN1380 #171)
CID+13651 pri108 U+885E vs18 JH-JTBAFD (IRGN1380 #181)
*a separate encodeing for one of the above could make two pri108 IVes wrong.
If the above IVes are not change then many of the above characters
will be displayed incorrectly whenever the default ignore is used.
To leave pri108 as it is should not be an option.
The above list resticts itself to those IVSes raised at IRG #29 hosted
by Adobe earlier this month.
There are other IVes that are suspect, these have been communicated
separately to Adobe.
> Still I wish if I the base characters of Adobe-Japan1 IVS
> were restricted to the sum of JIS character sets, but my
> comment about it is completely same with my previous comment,
> and I omit it.
> According to Adobe TechNote #5078 p. 96 clause #9,
> the glyph for the variation sequence VS19-12869
> used for U+6CE8 (partial chart p. 11) is a glyph
> introduced for "ruby" typesetting, not for standard
> CJK ideograph. In plain text of Unicode, the ruby
> may be coded by the interlinear annotations (U+FFF9
> - U+FFFB), so the relationship between using
> VS19-12869 and using interlinear annotations should
> be clarified: VS19-12869 should be used with or
> without the interlinear annotations?
> In addition, as I commented for PRI #98, many glyphs
> introduced for radical exemplifications are assigned
> variation sequences as the ideograph variant.
> I guess the variation sequences for these glyphs are
> NOT intended to be unique character encoding for these
> glyphs, it just provides the variation sequences from
> the side of Unified CJK ideographs.
> If my guess is right, is there any reason to ignore
> the ideographic glyphs in Adobe TechNote #5078
> p. 160 from 16285 to 16298? Adobe TechNote #5078
> does not comment explicitly, I guess these glyphs
> are introduced for Kanbun (U+3190-U+319F).
> Rick McGowan wrote:
>> The Ideographic Variation Database provides a registry for collections of
>> unique variation sequences containing unified ideographs, allowing for
>> standardized interchange according to UTS#37, Ideographic Variation
>> Database (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr37/). A submission to the
>> Ideographic Variation Database has been received for: "Combined
>> registration of the Adobe-Japan1 collection and of sequences in that
>> This is a second round of review for this submission. As a result of the
>> review of Adobe's original submission (PRI #98) several errors have been
>> corrected and feedback incorporated.
>> The main IVD page is here:
>> and the IVD review page for this submission is here:
>> The closing date for comments is 2007/11/25.
>> Reviewers are encouraged to comment on any aspect of the submissions, but
>> more particularly on:
>> * whether the intent of a proposed collection is
>> appropriately described
>> * whether the glyphic subset corresponding to a proposed
>> sequence is indeed a glyphic subset of the base character
>> for the sequence
>> * whether the proposed sequences are congruent with the
>> scope of their collection, or whether a new collection
>> may be more appropriate
>> All comments should be sent via the reporting form and will be forwarded
>> to the submitter. The content of the submission may be adjusted during the
>> review period to account for the comments received.
>> The reporting form can be found here:
>> If you wish to discuss issues on the Unicode mail list, then please use
>> the following link to subscribe (if necessary). Please be aware that
>> discussion comments on the Unicode mail list are not automatically recorded
>> as input to the UTC. You must use the reporting link above to generate
>> comments for UTC consideration.
>> Rick McGowan
>> Unicode, Inc.
This message sent through Virus Free Email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 25 2007 - 20:06:33 CST