Shouldn't HAN DIGIT NINE be a radical? I've seen it in a few places in kanji.
Also, what is the radical of "cut"? "Sword"?
I remember the "cut" chatacter by thinking that 7 swords do a lot of cutting.
$B!!!z$8$e$&$$$C$A$c$s!z(B
$B!!;d$O$m$3$($s$i$+$Y$5!#(B
Riddle of the week:
What song is 35971040100?
That is not a catalog number.
Hint: the chorus is 3597104042
--- Original Message ---
$B:9=P?M(B: Richard Cook <rscook@socrates.berkeley.edu>;
$B08@h(B: James Kass <jameskass@worldnet.att.net>;
Cc: unicode@unicode.org;
$BF|;~(B: 01/07/09 4:29
$B7oL>(B: Re: Erratum in Unicode book
>James Kass wrote:
>>
>> Richard Cook wrote:
>>
>> > "John H. Jenkins" wrote:
>> > >
>> > > It is on occasion something of an art figuring out the correct
>> > > radical/stroke position for a character in this kind of an index, sad
>> > > to say.
>> >
>> > I'd say, when 2 radicals are possible, put it under both. When 3, well
>> > ... you probably get the idea ...
>> >
>>
>> This is a swell item to add to a "wish list", but imagine the
>> challenge faced by anyone wanting to set-up such a database:
>> existing information is sorted by residual strokes after the
>> significant radical. When you want to add each character
>> under every one of its components, these residual stroke
>> counts would need to be re-counted for each 'permutation'
>> of every character!
>
>Well, not all components are Kang Xi radicals.
>
>What you're talking about is not a Kang Xi index, but a complete
>component index, and this is not quite the technical feat you imagine.
>
>E.g., I have complete component and rad/str data that is lexicon
>specific (Shuowen), and somewhat less complete general data.
>
>The most comprehensive collection of such data is from
>http://www.wenlin.com . When compiling wish lists, watch Wenlin's development.
>
>>
>> The Han Radical Index is set up for people familiar with CJK,
>> the rest of us will just have to guess (and learn something during
>> each look-up process, I'd suspect.)
>>
>
>Even for experts,there are cases in which the choice of a single
>classifier is completely arbitrary, or at least apprently so to the
>casual user. In these cases, putting the character under both is a good
>idea.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Jul 09 2001 - 00:58:43 EDT