From: Julian Bradfield (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Nov 20 2008 - 04:45:00 CST
One thing I don't really understand is the basis for the difference of
approach between alphabetic(-ish) and Han.
The UTC has said, no more precomposed characters.
On the other hand, the IRG is still encoding more and more obscure
hanzi, although surely the vast majority of them are describable using
ideographic description sequences, mostly in a canonical way. (And for
those characters with two equally obvious decompositions, I'm sure one
could impose a reasonable canonicalization criterion to choose one.)
Why are IDSes seen as a stop-gap measure until the described hanzi is
separately encoded, whereas combining diacritics are seen as the
definitive way to do things?
-- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 20 2008 - 04:48:59 CST