I have additional question about GB18030
the following code point in GB18030 are map to Private Usaer Araea in
Unicode but have a glyph in the GB18030 standard. What does that mean ?
page 11 of GB18030
0xA6EC
0xA6ED
0xA6F3
0xA6D9 - 0xA6DF
page 81 of GB18030
0xFE50 - 0xFEA0
ref- http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125407
Qingjiang (Brian) Yuan wrote:
>Frank and Deborah,
> After I saw the e-mail from Deborah, I asked our Beijing office to
>contact the CESI. The follow is the information we got:
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Have contacted with CESI. It is really a glyph bug. They have fixed it,
>but they did not notify us!
>
>CESI will not give us the updated fonts until tomorrow morning. It was
>said that there are serial glyph have been updated in the new version of
>the bitmap fonts.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Thanks.
>Brian.
>
>Yung-Fong Tang Wrote:
>
>>I looks like both Mac/Linux/Window N6.2 and current Mozilla map that to
>>FFE3. Looks like IE on winXP do the same way.
>>
>>We, mozilla i18n group, got the GB18030 mapping table from sun. B Yuan,
>>any comment?
>>
>>Michael Everson wrote:
>>
>>>At 11:23 -0800 2002-02-01, Deborah Goldsmith wrote:
>>>
>>>>There is an error on page 10 of the GB 18030-2000 standard, in that
>>>>the character with code point A3FE maps to U+FFE3 (FULLWIDTH MACRON),
>>>>but is shown with a glyph that corresponds to U+FF5E (FULLWIDTH
>>>>TILDE). The position of the character in its code block would also
>>>>seem to indicate that tilde was intended.
>>>>
>>>>Does anyone have any idea of which should be considered correct, the
>>>>glyph or the Unicode mapping value?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Glyphs are informative in JTC1. I can only assume that the GB
>>>standards would follow suit.
>>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Feb 14 2002 - 19:16:00 EST