On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, Kenneth Whistler wrote: >"Traditional Chinese" and "Simplified Chinese" are *not* two different >languages.
But they are naturally handled as such, no? After all, they employ the same Unicode codepoints but are displayed in a different font altogether. >The TC/SC distinction is an artifact of legacy choices made for encoding >characters and implementation of text in East Asian computer systems. It >is *not* a language distinction, and should not be tagged as such. But there are distinguishable dialectal differences between the variants of the base Chinese language used between the areas which primarily utilize Simplified and Traditional Chinese. Hence, even if they are not treated as separate languages, one cannot do a codepoint-for-codepoint transformation and end up with legible text. This sort of distinction *should* be tagged as a dialect variant, if I'm not incorrect altogether. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], tel:+358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2