Trad/simplified (Re: [idn] Re: Agenda Item for next UTC: Normalizing CaseMapping)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 05:56 19.02.00 +0800, James Seng wrote:
> Yes, now you getting it but not completely.
>
> I agreed that ISO10646 defines characters, not semantic meaning.
>
> But you can consider it 'accidential' that almost every word in Chinese has a
> meaning because that is the nature of the language. ditto for kanji.

You make the traditional/simplified distinction sound very much like the 
European cyrillic/latin distinction.
A few languages (Armenian, the late unlamented Serbocroatian) have been 
written using both, in which case you need equivalence rules that tell you 
when a word is the "same" between the two spellings.

I think I see a requirement looming.....

"Within a single zone, the zone manager MUST be able to define equivalence 
rules that suit the purpose of the zone, such as, but not limited to, and 
not necessarily, non-ASCII case folding, Unicode normalizations, 
Cyrillic/Latin folding, or traditional/simplified Chinese equivalence. Such 
defined equivalences MUST NOT remove equivalences that are assumed by (old 
or local-rule-ignorant) caches."

We'll have to define "equivalence" somewhere too - it and its equivalents 
have been bandied about much too loosely.

                    Harald



--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx