From: Ed Trager (ed.trager@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jan 25 2010 - 09:19:12 CST
Hi, Everyone,
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 10:43 PM, <mpsuzuki@hiroshima-u.ac.jp> wrote:
> 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'll probably cross-check between KanjiDic2 and Unihan.txt, but I have
not got that far yet.
> 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.
>
IMHO, a good improvement in Unihan.txt would be to have the readings
in Kana instead of romanization. Especially if the romanization is a
mixture of 2 different systems, that makes no sense. The Korean
readings in Unihan.txt are in Hangul and that makes sense.
> Regards,
> mpsuzuki
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 25 2010 - 09:23:56 CST