David Starner wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:18:19PM -0700, Yung-Fong Tang wrote:
> > Markus Scherer wrote:
> >
> > > Correction: "to encode _all_ of Unicode", not just "all Unicode BMP" - GB 18030 covers all 17 planes, not just the BMP.
> >
> > Does GB18030 DEFINED the mapping between GB18030 and the rest of 11 planes? I don't think so, since Unicode have not define
> > them yet, right ?
Sure Unicode defined those planes, but defining planes without defining the characters in it mean not too much to people. How can
you implement case conversion, property mapping without knowing what is inside. In particular, DOES GB18030 define code point to
code point mapping (beyond BMP) between Unicode? Unless you can said that is YES and show me the specification how to map between
them, there are no way people can implement code set conversion between GB18030 and Unicode.
>
>
> Unicode defined all the planes, a long long time ago. It's added
> characters for 3 of them - Plane 1 (basically the overflow area for the
> non-CJK part of the BMP), Plane 2 (more ideographs) and Plane 14
> (special tag characters). IIRC, GB18030 does map the non-BMP area.
> Why
> wouldn't GB18030 define the relationship between itself and the non-BMP
> planes? It's needed to properly handle Unicode (since extra Private Use
> planes sit way out there), now and in the future, and it takes less work
> to do it now than hack it on later.
That question is not wheather they should define the relationship or not, but have they defined it yet.
>
>
> --
> David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
> Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
> When the aliens come, when the deathrays hum, when the bombers bomb,
> we'll still be freakin' friends. - "Freakin' Friends"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Sep 26 2001 - 20:05:25 EDT