This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] BZ #19575: Clarify status of entries in GB 18030-2005.

On 02/09/2016 11:50 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> "Carlos O'Donell" <> writes:
>> Those mappings don't follow the printed normative standard
>> of GB 18030-2005, but that's OK, this is expected best practice.
> # The 2005 version of gb18030 includes updates to previous mappings that use to map to PUA
> # but are now mapped to actual Unicode codepoints.
> # (CJKV 2nd edition)

This statement is only partly correct. Some of the mappings were updated
but 24 mappings for PUA code points still remained.

CJKV Information Processing 2nd edition by Dr. Ken Lunde page 108:

"... Although PUA mappings for 24 characters are still printed in the GB
18030-2005 standard proper, it is important to note that as long as
Unicode Version 4.1 or greater is used, all 24 of these characters can be
safely mapped or otherwise handled without resorting to PUA code points ..."

Therefore the 24 mappings I mention in my comments are non-normative, they
are not part of the standard, but are a best-practice mapping to newer Unicode

My comments to the file clarify this situation.

Does that clarify my position?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]