X-Orcl-Application:In-Reply-To: UNX10.US.ORACLE.COM:unicode@unicode.org's message of 18-Sep-97 11:47
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Oracle InterOffice (version 4.0.4.0.0)
Content-Type:multipart/mixed; boundary="=_ORCL_13982931_0_11919709191316380"
--=_ORCL_13982931_0_11919709191316380
Content-Transfer-Encoding:7bit
Content-Type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I don't think the Unicode 2.0 is not correclty/completely addressing
the width of Hangul Jamo and syllables. That, as a contribution, should
be amended at the next version of Unicode.
Ienup
--=_ORCL_13982931_0_11919709191316380
Content-Type:message/rfc822
Date: 18 Sep 97 11:47:16
From:"John Cowan <cowan@drv.cbc.com>" <unicode@unicode.org>
To:Multiple,Recipients,of,<unicode@unicode.org>
Subject:Re: Some question about DOM(Core) Level 1 Darft 11-September-1997
Reply-to:unicode@unicode.org
Errors-To:uni-bounce@unicode.org
X-Uml-Sequence:3929 (1997-09-18 18:47:17 GMT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:7bit
Content-Type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
ISUNG.US.ORACLE.COM wrote:
> John Cowan wrote:
>
> >The status of U+1100-11FF and U+AC00-D7A3 is doubtful. Officially,
> >the first block (Hangul Jamo) is halfwidth and the second block
> >(Hangul Syllables) is neither, but they both look fullwidth to me.
>
> Both Hangul Jamo and syllables at Row 11 and Row AC ~ D7 are all
> fullwidth. There are halfwidth Hangul Jamo at Row FF.
Yes, that is what I think too, as it seems reasonable. Unfortunately,
it contradicts the letter of the Unicode Standard (p. 6-130):
# In the context of conversion to and from such mixed-width encodings,
# all characters in the General Scripts area [i.e. 0000-1FFF]
# should be construed as halfwidth (*hankaku*) characters.
That purports to include the combining jamo at 1100-11FF. The rest of
the paragraph says:
# All characters in the CJK Phonetics and Symbols area [i.e. 3000-33FF]
# and the Unified CJK Ideograph area [i.e. 4E00-9FFF], along with
# the characters in the CJK Compatibility Ideographs [i.e. F900-FAFF],
# CJK Compatibility Forms [i.e. FE30-FE4F], and Small Form Variants
# blocks [i.e. FE50-FE6F], should be construed as fullwidth (*zenkaku*)
# characters. Other Compatibility Area [i.e. F900-FFFF] characters
# outside of the current block should be construed as halfwidth
# characters. The characters of the Symbols Area are neutral regarding
# their width semantics.
Note that the Standard is silent on the halfwidth/fullwidth status of the
Hangul Syllables area.
As far as I can tell, ISO 10646 is silent on the terms "halfwidth" and
"fullwidth" except to say that the characters so named are provided
for compatibility.
-- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban--=_ORCL_13982931_0_11919709191316380--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:37 EDT