[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: JISX0213 mapping table

Gaspar Sinai writes:

> I would be glad if we could reconcile these files and come up
> with a common format till it is undefined by Unicode.
> 
> The diff is quite small now.

81,82c81,82
< 0x12171	0x00A2
< 0x12172	0x00A3
---
> 0x12171	0xFFE0
> 0x12172	0xFFE1
138c138
< 0x1224C	0x00AC
---
> 0x1224C	0xFFE2

These are due to differences in the JISX0208 mapping. I use the one
which was on unicode.org for years (now declared "obsolete").

148,149c148,149
< 0x12256	0xFF5F
< 0x12257	0xFF60
---
> 0x12256	0x2985
> 0x12257	0x2986

Look at the glyphs. I used
  http://ftp.ora.com/cjkvinfo/pdf/jisx0208+0213.pdf
  http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/ISO-IR/   228 and 229

214c214
< 0x1233A	0x2299
---
> 0x1233A	0x29BF
555c555
< 0x12678	0x30D7
---
> 0x12678	0x31F7	0x309A

These are indeed debatable.

996,997c996,997
< 0x12B65	0xFFFD
< 0x12B66	0xA4A3
---
> 0x12B65	0x02E9	0x02E5
> 0x12B66	0x02E5	0x02E9

I don't understand how the glyphs of 0x02E9 and 0x02E5 can combine to
the "RISING SIGN" or "FALLING SIGN".

7765a7766
> 0x17427	???

An unmapped code point. jisx0208+0213.pdf shows "reserved" at 0xEAA5.

Bruno


--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/