Re: [unicode] kJapaneseOn and kJapaneseKun Use What Romanization Standard?

From: mpsuzuki@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
Date: Sun Jan 24 2010 - 21:43:06 CST

  • Next message: Ed Trager: "Re: [unicode] kJapaneseOn and kJapaneseKun Use What Romanization Standard?"

    Hi,

    Yet I've not checked the content of kanjidic2 files in detail,
    but the introduction tells that the coverage of kanji is
    JIS X 0208 and JIS X 0212. The kJanapese{On,Kun} in Unihan.txt
    covers the kanjis that Japanese NB had never proposed to UCS.
    However, I think the coverage of kanjidic2 is sufficient to
    handle common digitized text from Japan, because the character
    encodings derived from JIS X 0208 is still dominant in Japan.

    I guess kJapanese{On,Kun} in Unihan.txt are collected from some
    Japanese dictionary (or multiple dictionaries?). So, Kanjidic2
    cannot replace all readings in Unihan.txt.

    If anybody wants to "improve" kJapanese{On,Kun} in Unihan.txt,
    the detailed use-case should be described, because there might
    be some conflicts among the solution for each use-case.

    Regards,
    mpsuzuki

    On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:36:27 -0500
    Ed Trager <ed.trager@gmail.com> wrote:

    >Thanks, Christoph!
    >
    >>
    >> Did you have a look at <http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/kanjidic2/> ?
    >> Kanjidic has On and Kun readings in Kana.
    >>
    >
    >Yes, That's much more convenient!
    >
    >William Poser is correct in pointing out that I could probably do
    >accurate conversion to kana from the romanization in Unihan. But why
    >bother when kanjidic2 already has everything in Kana? Also it looks
    >like kanjidic2 has a larger number of readings anyway.
    >
    >Best - Ed
    >
    >
    >> -Christoph
    >>
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 24 2010 - 21:46:55 CST