Re: lua for unicode

[John Belmonte <jvb@...>]

Björn De Meyer wrote:
> The other more important problem wich I mention here is CJK 
> unification. If I am not mistaken, even in Unicode of these days, 
> many Chinese, Japanese and Korean ideographs have not been 
> included on grounds of being  historical forms, being 
> "too similar" with other ideographs, on grounds of being 
> uncommon in usage, or on grounds of being writable by
> other characters.

For Japanese, I think in the 50's there was a movement to reduce the 
number "essential characters", likely with the goal of improving the 
literacy rate.  A set of 1,850 characters was adopted by law and 
publications now limit themselves to that set except for proper names, 
as you say.

If there is a group of Japanese not happy with the unicode situation, 
aren't they free to press for additions to the code set, and to lobby 
their government to produce a complete and freely licensed font to 
preserve their heritage?

-John



--
http:// if     .   /