> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tomohiro KUBOTA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
...
> Read carefully my other mails. My opinion is not related to change
> codepoints of unified ideographs, i.e., I am not opposing to Han
> Unification itself now.
!
> I insist that using a unified font for Han ideographs is wrong.
Nobody has suggested that one should use a "unified font". Use a
"Japanese" font for a Japanese text; use a "Chinese" font for
Chinese text. There are even fonts that *within* the font have
different glyphs for Japanese, Chinese, ...
> I wrote it many times. Font must be changed according to the
> language of the (plain) text. Did IRG insist that unified font
> can be used for multilingual text? If yes, please show me the
> sentence. I'll write again. DON'T SHOW ME THE SENTENCE OF HAN
> UNIFICATION ITSELF. It cannot be an evidence that IRG think unified
> font may be used for multilingual text.
But you can't switch font within a text without a font
switching mechanism! So-called plain text does not have a font
switching mechanism, so you need to use so-called rich text.
(I know, there is now the Plane 0E (14) tag characters;
but they should not be used. They are there only for political
reasons, and will most likely be ignored or even filtered away.
They are difficult to handle, compare 2022, and are best never
used. In particular they are not to be used with markup (like XML).)
If almost all of the text you use is in Japanese, set a Japanese
font as the default font. Note that you will find nearly no
font that covers all of Unicode/10646 (which is not recommended
anyway). It is also possible to use heuristics to detect if a
text is Japanese, Korean or Chinese (if there's any Hiragana,
it's probably Japanese...). I'm not saying that you should
rely on heuristics, but it has been suggested sometimes.
Kind regards
/kent k
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
