Liwal,
Such classifications are not easy. For example Azeri can be written in both
Latin and Cyrillic scripts. The Latin script is much like Turkish which has
the dotted and dot-less i. This is not necessarily be big issue for fonts
but is requires special case shifting logic.
What do you do about scripts that are not tied to a locale? The Orthodox
Church uses a special Cyrillic font that is different from standard
Cyrillic.
The classifications vary not only by script but by how it affects you
specific field of interest and the implementation. For example Unicode
implements Ethiopian has fully formed syllabic characters. Some
implementations use decomposed syllables. This allows 256 byte code pages
but it requires glyph composition. This would make is similar to SE Asian
and Indic processing. But with fully composed glyphs you would classify the
language differently probably as a large characters set language with an
input method editor like the CJK languages.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]On
Behalf Of N.R.Liwal
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 8:52 PM
To: Jungshik Shin
Cc: unicode@unicode.org
Subject: Re: RECOMMENDATIONs( Term Asian is not used properly on
Computers and NET)
Dear Jungshik Shin;
Thanks, good explinations, I hope those who are interested in Software and
Web for Asia will be
benefited.
Thanks.
Liwal
----- Original Message ----- > On Wed, 30 May 2001, N.R.Liwal wrote:
>
> > TERM ASIA IN COMPUTER & INTERNET (RECOMMENDATIONS UNICODE LIST "MAY
2001")
> >
> > So far the recomendations are, that "Asian Text Fonts" can be called:
> > -Han Fonts or Hanzi Fonts
>
> As already pointed out, this is not adqueate to cover Korean
> and Japanese because other scripts are also used for them. Moreover,
> Japanese may not like 'Hanzi' even if you're talking about
> Hanzi/Kanji/Hanja alone. Even 'Han' (which is more neutral) could be
> balked at by some.
>
> > -"East Asian Unified" Fonts
> > -"East Asian" Fonts
>
> If they mean fonts for Chinese, Japanese and Korean writing
> systems, I would pick 'East Asian fonts'.
>
>
> > Script Can be classified as:
> > -languages which Han ideographs
>
> you're talking not about language(s) but about script(s) , right?
>
> > -'ideographic languages' SCRIPT
>
> A language cannot be ideographic as I wrote before. Has anybody else
> mentioned this term other than me? I mentioned it not because I think it's
> appropriate BUT because I think that the term ("ideographic language")
> MUST NOT be used.
>
> > -"East Asian Unified" SCRIPT
>
> What's been 'unified' is Han 'ideographs' while there ARE other
> scripts in (more predominant) use in the region (even if you only mean
> Chinese,Japanese and Korean by 'East Asian').
>
> > - "East Asian" SCRIPT
>
> What 'script' (not 'scripts') are you talking about here?
> If you just mean 'Han ideographs', I don't think you need to come up with
> new term(s). I think 'Han ideograph' (or CJK ideographs if it ONLY means
> Hanzi/Kanji/Hanja and nothing else) is good enough (although certainly
> not perfect.) On the other hand, if you're talking about all the scripts
> used in Northeast/East Asian countries (or China, Japan and Korea),
> you CANNOT use any of the above with the possible exception of the last
> (which can be used provided that they're made plural 'East Asian Scripts'
> to reflect that there are *multiple* scripts in use.)
>
>
> > Asian geographic expressions are better:
> > -"Southeast Asia", "East Asia" "CENRAL ASIA"
> > "WEST ASIA = Arabic Countries and Neighborhood"
>
> I believe the following are widely used at least in 'geography
> text books' and 'encyclopedia'. Also, many US schools with regional
> studies programs use similar divisions (except for Southwest Asian which
> appears to be refered to as 'Middle East' most of time). This division
> is bound to be aribtrary to some degree (Asian continent is not a circle
> or any definitive geometric shape which can be divided in an unambiguous
> way ;-) )
>
>
> East Asia/Northeast Asia : Japan, Korea, China (it's a huge country,
> but....)
> 'Far East' (in Western media and
> at least in some East Asian
media :-) )
> Southeast Asia : Indochina,
Malaysia,Singapor,Indonesia,Thai,Burma,
> .....
> South Asia : India,Pakistan,Sri
Lanka,Bangladesh,Nepal,....
> Soutwest Asia : The part of Asia usually called 'Middle East'
> (in Western media and at least in some
> East Asian media :-) )
> Arabian peninsular, Iran, Iraq,
> Turkey(Near East?),
> Afganistan(it could be put in South Asia...)
> Central Asia : Mongol and some former republics of USSR (now
> independent. e.g Kazahstan)
> North Asia (??) : Siberia?
>
> FYI, Mozilla uses the following:
>
> East Asian : Chinese, Japanese, Korean
> SE & SW Asian : Thai, Armenian*, Turkish*
> Middle Eastern : Hebrew, Arabic
> Western European: ..., Greek*(why?),.....
> Eastern European:
>
> I guess it's better than Office XP which calls Chinese,Japanese, Korean
> 'Asian', but it could still have done better. (Middle East and SW Asia
> overlap each other so that they had better split up SE&SW Asia, remove
> Middle East'ern', put Armenian, Turkish, Hebrew and Arabic into 'SW
> Asian' and fill up 'SE Asian' with Thai, Vietnamese, Cambodian and so
> forth when they get supported). That is, I would use the following
> for programs like web browser and word processor.
>
>
> East Asian : Chinese, Japanese, Korean + some more
> (or NE Asian) if necessary and supported (e.g Yi)
> SE Asian : Thai,Vietnamese,Lao, Khmer, etc
> South Asian : various Indic scripts (other than those included in
> SE Asian), Tibet*
> SW Asian : Arabic, Hebrew, Syriac, Armenian*, Turkish*, etc
> (Middle Eastern)
> Central Asian: Mongolian, Khazahstan(?), .... when supported
>
> Of course, geographic break-up has its pitfalls and some people
> for sure wouldn't like it for various reasons. For instance, Turkish
> and Vietnamese writing systems are Latin-alphabet-based, which others
> in the group they're in don't share. Also Indic/Indic-like scripts are
> used both in South Asian and SE Asian countries(of course NOT in all
> countries there). However, geographic brake-up(with some scripts put in
> more than one groups) may be the best unless end-users are expected to be
> 'writing-system experts'. (I mean 'geography experts(?)' are easier to
> find among end-users than 'writing system experts'. )
>
>
> Jungshik Shin
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 00:18:17 EDT