Re: [tlug] i-mode i18n

[Jim Breen <jwb@example.com>]

Ulrich Plate <plate@example.com> wrote:
>> Jim Breen <jwb@example.com> wrote:
>> > TRON! I'd prefer Shit_JIS to going with TRON's anti-Unicode line.
>> 
>> Quote:
>> "Because native speakers of different languages and/or bilingual people
>> can inhabit the same city, the BTRON machine must be capable of handling
>> the character sets of all the languages of the world. Moreover,
>> character handling on the BTRON machine must faithfully reflect
>> character usage as it manifests itself in the culture of a particular
>> people, no matter how large or cumbersome that character set might be.
>> (Note: for this reason, Unicode is rejected for use in the TRON
>> Architecture.)" (Source: http://tronweb.super-nova.co.jp/btron.html)
>> 
>> WTF? Am I missing an important syllogism behind those lines? Do they
>> wait until Unicode manifests itself in the culture of a particular
>> people? $deity, orthodoxy always scares the shift out of me. :-)

No, the line is that the "Han Unification" polluted the characterspace
by mixing Chinese-looking characters with Japanese-looking ones.
Accoding to their line, the character "7", which in many European
countries is (hand)written with an extra horizontal stroke, should have
two code-points. ISO-10646/Unicode's unification principle is that the
glyph is a rendering issue. JIS X 0221 (the Japanese edition of
ISO-10646) goes so far as to print Japanese/Chinese/Korean
representative glyphs for many kanji to try and emphasize this point,
but the cranks have closed their minds.

TRON as an embedded OS is not a bad idea. It's a pity it got mixed up
with a pack of code-set Luddites.

Jim

-- 
Jim Breen  (j.breen@example.com  http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/)
Computer Science & Software Engineering,                Tel: +61 3 9905 3298
P.O Box 26, Monash University,                          Fax: +61 3 9905 5146
Clayton VIC 3800, Australia      ジム・ブリーン@モナシュ大学