ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 IRG N445 >From - Wed Feb 19 08:10:06 1997 To: joezhg@public.bta.net.cn cc: whchoi@cosmos.kaist.ac.kr Subject: What happend to U+7FC5? Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 15:48:59 PST From: "Ken Lunde" X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 291 Zhoucai, What happened to the KS mapping for U+7FC5? It maps to 0x6347 in KS C 5601-1992 ("0-6347" according to the mapping files), but I see that it instead maps to 2-542D in the N443.txt and N411A.txt files, which refers to a KS standard I am not aware of). Regards... -- Ken =================== >From - Wed Feb 19 10:04:06 1997 To: joezhg@public.bta.net.cn cc: whchoi@cosmos.kaist.ac.kr, mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch, acmuller@gol.com Subject: KS mapping errors, I think ========================== Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 18:05:55 PST From: "Ken Lunde" X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 1615 Zhoucai, Hello again! I went through the mappings for KS C 5601-1992 and KS C 5657-1991 using previous data available and the N411A.txt and N443.txt mapping files at the IRG web site (http://www.cs.cuhk.edu.hk/~irg/). Here are my findings (all character codes are in hexadecimal): o U+7FC5 should map to 0-6347 not 2-5D51 This results in 4,619 mappings to KS C 5601-1992 (not counting the 268 in the compatibility zone), which is one less than the required 4,620 for full compatibility with KS C 5601-1992. This is a problem, for sure. o U+87D2 should map to 1-602D not 2-5D3F This incorrect mapping was in N411A.txt, but removed in N443.txt. Apparently, the incorrect mapping in N411A.txt (2-5D3F) overwrote the (correct) 1-602D mapping, but when the 2-5D3F mapping was removed (well, moved to U+87E2), the 1-602D was not restored. This resulted in 2,855 mappings, one less than the required 2,856 for compatibility with KS C 5657-1991. Another problem. Can these be explained? Also, to what specific KS standards do the "2" and "3" mappings refer? (The "3" mappings are in the additional et of 6,585 han characters.) I am aware of only KS C 5601-1992 ("0") and KS C 5657-1991 ("1"). Are these new KS standards published yet? If so, what are their designations? Regards... -- Ken P.S. All of this makes me wonder what other errors are lurking in the data. I did a "diff" on the previous mappings, which turned up these two errors, so chances are that the basic two KS mappings have only these two errors in the IRG's latest data.