Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- From: Scott Stone <sstone@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 18:22:51 +0900 (JST)
- Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96LJ1.1b7.981019175601.9836B-100000@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Sender: owner-tlug@example.com
On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Jonathan Byrne wrote: > On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > I also don't see the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese cooperating on > > M17N if it isn't imposed from the outside (if they hadn't participated > > in Unicode/UCS, Xerox, MS, and ANSI would have done it to them, making > > it much worse). At least for the Europeans, the languages of the > > dominant nations all fit into ISO-8859-1 and _one_ byte. I can't see > > the Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans (not to mention the Vietnamese and > > Taiwanese) quietly getting together and creating Unified Han in two > > bytes (look at the sound and fury created when that was enforced from > > the outside), nor do I see them being willing to jump to 3 or 4 bytes. > > Why should they be unwilling to use a four-byte system? Yes, it uses more > memory and disk space, but both are so cheap now that claiming either of > those as a reason for not doing it wouldn't hold much water. And if they > also require more processing power, the dizzying rate at which that > increases will leave us with no problem there, either. I believe that the UN would have to send in air strikes against anyone who tried to pull a 4-byte system on the computing world. 2 byte is bad enough. > > So those are the (readily apparent) potential negatives: you may need a more > powerful machine to deal with four-byte characters. On the positive side, a > four-byte character system pretty much has room for everybody (if it > doesn't, we could go to five or six if necessary). NIH is a powerful force, > and perhaps this what you're thinking of, but outside of that, why should > there be opposition to a unified four-byte character set incorporating, > among others, the entire Han set? no, no, we want to SIMPLIFY the human - machine interface, not make it more complex. a 4-byte system would definitely be a step in the wrong direction, IMHO. -------------------------------------------------- Scott M. Stone <sstone@example.com, sstone@example.com> <sstone@example.com> Head of TurboLinux Development/Systems Administrator Pacific HiTech, Inc (USA) / Pacific HiTech, KK (Japan) http://www.pht.com http://armadillo.pht.co.jp http://www.pht.co.jp http://www.turbolinux.com --------------------------------------------------------------- Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691 Next Meeting: 12 December, 12:30 Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate --------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- From: Jonathan Byrne <jq@example.com>
- Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@example.com>
- References:
- Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- From: Jonathan Byrne <jq@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- Next by Date: Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- Prev by thread: Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- Next by thread: Re: tlug: kanji or romaji for Japanese? (was: parallel-port IDE)
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links