Fw: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-cjk-00.txt

["James Seng" <James@Seng.cc>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Seng" <jseng@i-dns.net>
To: "Frank Ernens" <fgernens@enternet.com.au>; <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-cjk-00.txt


> > > Can you please explain this further? How would ancient Vietnamese suffer
> > > because of modern Chinese?
> >
> > I must stress that I don't know ancient (or modern) Vietnamese. But
> > consider a Chinese character which has been simplified by replacing
> > one of its radicals by an existing radical with fewer strokes. The
> > SC designers knew that this combination of radicals did not otherwise
> > exist in Chinese. But does it perhaps exist in ancient Vietnamese
> > or some other language using this script? How would we check?
>
> The simplification of han ideograph is not as simple as replacing/remove
> radicals (altho that is one of the method). But I am sidetracking here...
>
> Yes, it is possible that the simplified _chinese_ ideograph may in fact be
> same as another ideograph which already exist in another language. But this
is
> a basic problem for all languages which share same script.
>
> -James Seng
>