Jungshik Shin pointed out:
>
> One remaining issue to resolve is which charcters are half-width and
> which are full-width. In CJK cases, it's clear-cut, but in UTF-8, it's
> not so. I guess it would be all right if vi and terminal emulator can
> agree with each other on the character width. Perhaps, the following rules
> of thumb might work:
>
> 1. All characters "derived" from ISO-8859-x and
> other single byte charcaters sets(and related) are half-width
> even if they're also defined in CJK source standard
> (e.g. U???? copyright symbol would be half-width
> even thought it's full-width in CJK environment)
> 2. CJKV UniHan and Korean Hangul(pre-composed) are full-width
> 3. All characters in CJK compatibility blocks are full-width
> ..... and some more
>
>
Please see Draft Unicode Technical Report #11, "Unicode Character
Property 'East Asian Width'":
http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/dtr11.html
That report attempts to provide an answer for this question in
detail, based on implementation experience.
If you have any feedback for the author of that technical report,
now would be a good time to provide it, while the draft is open
for comments.
--Ken Whistler
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:43 EDT