From: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Dec 25 2007 - 02:34:33 CST
-On [20071225 03:56], James Kass (email@example.com) wrote:
>The Standard calls characters in those radical blocks compatibility
>characters. The Standard also says that those radical-specific
>characters should never be used as ideographs in text.
I must have misunderstood that late at night, my apologies if that was indeed
what you were trying to point out and me not getting it.
>My question to you is: Is there anything about your application which
>would require the use of those compatibility characters? In other words,
>why not simply use the ideographs?
Well, in this case I am using the radicals as, indeed, a selection method to
get to the appropriate kanji.
I guess I need to reread parts of the standard to get my mind clear on this. I
like the semantic separation, radical from generic CJK glyph, as what I am
using is indeed the radical.
-- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ In every stone sleeps a crystal...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 25 2007 - 02:37:53 CST