From: Asmus Freytag (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Feb 28 2008 - 11:28:49 CST
On 2/28/2008 5:21 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> Asmus Freytag wrote:
>> PS: whether or not "before, after" allows a break after the
>> comma and the following space (2 characters) is beside the
>> point for Japanese text, which customarily does NOT have spaces.
> True, but you shouldbe more specific: Japanse text do not *encode* spaces,
> because they are not needed with the glyph forms used by ideographic
> punctuation signs that are larger than basic european punctuation.
Japanese does not use spaces between words (or characters). The proper
spacing around punctuation marks is subject to layout rules specified in
Japanese Standard JIS X4051, for example, and does not necessarily
correspond to the way simple plain text looks when using fixed-width fonts.
From this, and similar statements in the remainder of the message I can
see that this is a topic on which you are merely speculating, but
lacking any actual knowledge of Japanese text layout, you appear to have
nothing of value to contribute to the discussion. As usual, my
recommendation for people interested in useful or authoritative
information is to ignore this post.
> Note that even when writing with halfwidth kanas, the punctuations are still
> written with the fullwidth glyph that includes a spacing margin on the left
> side. It can be said that the ideographic puntuations are composing in the
> same square a narrow glyph for the punctuation sign itself, and a halfwidth
> space. You don't need fiurther spacing after them. So the closing
> ideographic punctuation are already followed internally by space. The rule
> that was created for parentheses around optional Latin
> prefixes/suffixes/infixes in the same word should not apply to ideographic
> But this would require changing the line-breaking class for these large
> ideographic punction signs to something else than OP and CL, when they
> already embed na implied space, and then it would solve the problem by
> treating them according to CL%AL as if these CL were CL SP and so CL × SP ÷
> AL would correctly allow the linebreaking after the ideographic comma or
> ideographic full stop...
> But there remains the case of ideographic numbers written with fullwidth
> digits, we should still have CL × NU to avoid breaking a number after a
> grouping or decimal separator withing the same number...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 28 2008 - 11:32:16 CST