On 12 Nov 2001, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > Tomohiro KUBOTA: > > TK> How about GBK and GB18030? GBK is slightly more dirty than Big5 > TK> because C1 region is used for the first byte for 2 byte characters. > TK> However, I think GBK is not so popular and GB18030 will be more > TK> important in future (though I imagine GB18030 support is difficult). > > GBK is easy. GB 18030 is slightly more tricky, but definitely doable. > Same comment as above. > > TK> How about Johab? > > Don't know. We'll see.
It's marginally useful, but not necessary since I have yet to find a single web page and receive a single *internet* email encoded in JOHAB (except for some test pages I made for Mozilla). Moreover, __what JOHAB can do for Korean Unicode/UTF-8 can do much better__. There may still be some BBS' using Johab, though. Much more useful is, although I hate to 'endorse' MS's proprieatary extension, Windows-949/CP949/Unified Hangul Code. There are numerous web pages and emails in this encoding floating around the net disguised as EUC-KR (or a complete non-sense-name of ks_c_5601-1987). Anyway, if you want to support JOHAB, you have all you need since ksc5601.1992-3.enc is already in XF86 CVS. Its code-point arrangement is similar to Big5, GBK and Shift_JIS. So is Windows-949. Jungshik Shin -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
