Richard Gillam wrote:
>I have yet to hear a good reason why the Serbian/Russian problem is
>anything more than a font-selection issue. It's the same problem
>you have with Greek/Coptic, Arabic/Urdu/Persian, and Traditional
>Chinese/Simplified Chinese/Japanese.
I agree: Ol Korekt, apart one error, that should probably find its place in
some FAQ:
Traditional and simplified Chinese are not font variants of each
other!
These two national variants of ideographs (used in People's Republic and
Taiwan, respectively) have actually been encoded as different characters.
This is because of how the "CJK Unification" process has been defined. Maybe
this is a blunder, maybe it would have been more correct, or fair, or useful
that they were font variants: I don't know and I don't want to discuss this,
but please just take notice of the fact.
_Marco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT