Andrew West 於 2011年10月20日 上午3:25 寫道： > On 19 October 2011 18:41, John H. Jenkins <jenk...@apple.com> wrote: >> >> U+613F kDefinition (variant/simplification of U+9858 願) desire, want, wish; >> (archaic) prudent, cautious >> U+613F kSemanticVariant U+9858<kFenn:T >> U+613F kSpecializedSemanticVariant U+9858<kHanYu:T >> U+613F kTraditionalVariant U+613F U+9858 >> U+613F kSimplifiedVariant U+613F >> U+9858 kSimplifiedVariant U+613F U+2B5B8 >> U+9858 kSemanticVariant U+9613F<kFenn:T >> >> Andrew, does that look like it covers everything correctly? > > Looks OK to me (except for the typo on the last line), although I > wonder about the necessity for: > > U+613F kSimplifiedVariant U+613F > > Where a character can either traditionalify (what is the opposite of > simplify?) to another character or stay the same then it is useful to > have (e.g.): > > U+613F kTraditionalVariant U+613F U+9858 > > But where a character does not change on simplification, is it not > redundant to give it a kSimplifiedVariant mapping to itself ?
Per the latest draft of UAX #38, if, when mapping from SC to TC, a character may change or may be left alone depending on context, it should be included in among its both simplified and traditional variants. And so… > But there are other characters that fit this paradigm that do not have > kSimplifiedVariant mappings to themself, such as: > > U+5E72 干 > > But maybe that is a reflection of this line: > > U+5E72 kTraditionalVariant U+4E7E U+5E79 > > which I think should be: > > U+5E72 kTraditionalVariant U+4E7E U+5E72 U+5E79 > Yes, this should be fixed. If you know of any others, please let me know. ===== Hoani H. Tinikini John H. Jenkins jenk...@apple.com
