> From: Kenneth Whistler [mailto:kenw@sybase.com]
> > Also, I see that the script for Chinese is listed as "Han", not
> > "Chinese". Must we insist on confusing people?
>
> The script in question is designated "Han" in the Unicode Standard,
> and has always been so, in part because it is also used for Japanese,
> Korean, and Vietnamese, and not just Chinese.
That might be an argument, if "Han" *didn't* mean "Chinese". The
script is called "Chinese characters" in the local language in every
language I've come across, including English. Only amidst the Unicode crowd
have I encountered any other name.
> So I think it would
> be equally or more confusing to list the *script* for Chinese
> as Chinese, implying that it is somehow different from the Han
> script otherwise so designated in many places on the Unicode website
> and in the Unicode Standard.
No, Japanese and Korean should be listed as using Chinese script as
well, since they do.
Look, if the UTC wants to invent a new name for the script in order
to tap dance their way around political sensitivities that simply do not
exist, they can dance to their heart's content for all I care. However, the
web page in question is being posted as a service to those who know little
to nothing about the languages and scripts in question, and the term "Han
font", when typed into most search engines, does not tend to lead one
towards a font suitable for viewing Chinese, Japanese, or Korean text.
"Chinese font", on the other hand, tends to put useful links on the first
screenful. "CJK font" is also productive, but not quite as productive as
"Chinese font".
So perhaps you should consider listing the script as "Han(Chinese)"
or "Han(CJK)", so that the list can serve its purpose.
/|/|ike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Jul 30 2001 - 16:32:29 EDT