Marco.Cimarosti@icl.com wrote:
> Frank Tang wrote:
> >0xA3BB 0x02D9 # DOT ABOVE (Mandarin Chinese light tone)
> >0xA3BC 0x02C9 # MODIFIER LETTER MACRON (Mandarin Chinese first tone)
> >0xA3BD 0x02CA # MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT (Mandarin Chinese second
> tone)
> >0xA3BE 0x02C7 # CARON (Mandarin Chinese third tone)
> >0xA3BF 0x02CB # MODIFIER LETTER GRAVE ACCENT (Mandarin Chinese fourth
> tone)
> >...
> >02C7;CARON;...;Mandarin Chinese third tone;;;
> >02C8;MODIFIER LETTER VERTICAL LINE;...
> >02C9;MODIFIER LETTER MACRON;...;Mandarin Chinese first tone;;;
> >02CA;MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT;...;Mandarin Chinese second tone;;;
> >02D9;DOT ABOVE;...;Mandarin Chinese light tone;;;
> >...
> >302A;IDEOGRAPHIC LEVEL TONE MARK;...
> >302B;IDEOGRAPHIC RISING TONE MARK;...
> >302C;IDEOGRAPHIC DEPARTING TONE MARK;...
> >302D;IDEOGRAPHIC ENTERING TONE MARK;...
>
> Are these mappings correct? I always thought that pinyin and bopomofo used
> the same marks for tones.
That is a big question mark to me. The first question is- are they combining
characters or not ? I don't think any CJK character set define any combining
characters. Even the Hangul fillter in KSC is defined as non combining
character. If they are not combining characters, then they should NOT to be
mapped to they character you suggest. Otherwise, probably they are a good
choice.
Also, all the following mappin map them same as the Big5.TXT map-
From Taligent- ftp://ftp.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/EASTASIA/OTHER/BIG5.TXT
Listed in my origional mail
and ftp://ftp.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/EASTASIA/OTHER/CNS11643.TXT
0x1256C 0x02D9 # DOT ABOVE
0x1256D 0x02C9 # MODIFIER LETTER MACRON
0x1256E 0x02CA # MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT
0x1256F 0x02C7 # CARON
0x12570 0x02CB # MODIFIER LETTER GRAVE ACCENT
From Microsoft
ftp://ftp.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/VENDORS/MICSFT/WINDOWS/CP950.TXT
0xA3BB 0x02D9 #DOT ABOVE
0xA3BC 0x02C9 #MODIFIER LETTER MACRON
0xA3BD 0x02CA #MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT
0xA3BE 0x02C7 #CARON
0xA3BF 0x02CB #MODIFIER LETTER GRAVE ACCENT
From Apple-
ftp://ftp.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/VENDORS/APPLE/CHINTRAD.TXT
0xA3BB 0x02D9 # DOT ABOVE (Mandarin Chinese light tone)
0xA3BC 0x02C9 # MODIFIER LETTER MACRON (Mandarin Chinese first tone)
0xA3BD 0x02CA # MODIFIER LETTER ACUTE ACCENT (Mandarin Chinese second tone)
0xA3BE 0x02C7 # CARON (Mandarin Chinese third tone)
0xA3BF 0x02CB # MODIFIER LETTER GRAVE ACCENT (Mandarin Chinese fourth tone)
>
>
> My personal list for bopomofo tones would be this:
>
> * 1st: U+0304 (COMBINING MACRON)
> * 2nd: U+0301 (COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT)
> * 3rd: U+030C (COMBINING CARON)
> * 4th: U+0300 (COMBINING GRAVE ACCENT)
> * light: U+0307 (COMBINING DOT ABOVE)
>
> It is the same list that I would use for pinyin, apart the light tone, that
> in pinyin is a small circle:
>
> * light: U+030A (COMBINING RING ABOVE)
>
> (There is also another difference: the mark for the light tone is normally
> dropped in pinyin, while bopomofo often drops the mark for 1st tone).
This rule of dropping tone mark is defined in "Table 2 Comparision between the
first and second form of Mandarin Pronuncation Symbol", The Second Form of
Mandarin Pronunciation Symbol, Ministry of Education, Republic of China, ID-
Tai (75) 03848, Janurary 28, ROC Era 75 (1986). In that document, The first
form of Mandarin Pronunciation Symbol referred to Bopomofo and the second form
referred to pinyin.
>
>
> What is wrong with this list? Why did Unicode choose spacing marks for
> Bopomofo tones in the Big-5 table?
>
> _Marco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT