I originally wrote:
>I've got GBK-encoded text that contains a number of Traditional
>Hanzi characters. I'd like to convert all of these to their
>Simplified equivalents. So does anybody know of a GBK table that
>maps each Traditional form to its Simplified form?
michka responded with:
>>Not all Traditional forms *have* a Simplified form (thats why they called it
>>Simplified, since there were fewer ideographs!). There are conversion tools
>>in Word and in Windows (The LCMapString function will do this).
Frank Tang added:
>Well... in theory, they MUST have one. They are used in the same
>language by brothers and sisters (yes, my mother use Traditioanl
>Chinese in Taiwan and my uncle use Simplified Chinese in Shanghai).
>
>For unicode, it does NOT define a mapping table for that. But there
>are public domain conversion to map between BIG5 and GB2312 for
>years. ( I start use one of them hc3 in my Chinese bible -
><http://people.netscape.com/ftang/>http://people.netscape.com/ftang/
>BIBLE/v2frame.html )
>
>Maybe you could use that public domain mapping table to produce such mapping.
>
>A lot of time TWO GB2312 will map to the same BIG 5 character. Also,
>GBK/GB18030 probably cover more character than GB2312. Also, GBK
>also include some tradtional chinese, not sure you want to map them
>to what.
Here's my response to michka, which I should have copied to the list:
>I don't think this works for me. What I'm looking for is the
>conversion between traditional and simplified forms _inside_ of the
>GBK encoding. I'm not looking for converting between Big-5 and
>GB2312. GBK is a superset of GB2312, and it includes GB/T 12345-90,
>which is the character set developed in mainland China to provide
>for traditional forms of simplified characters found in GB2312.
So I'm still looking for a GBK-to-GBK mapping table that maps
traditional forms of Hanzi to their simplified equivalents.
Thanks,
-- Ken
Ken Krugler
TransPac Software, Inc.
<http://www.transpac.com>
+1 530-470-9200
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Jan 10 2002 - 22:28:52 EST