pragma at wxs.nl
Wed Dec 14 23:19:03 CET 2005
Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hans Hagen wrote:
>> chinese is not yet defined in utf so if you want that, we need to do it
> We probably should.
>> question: do the unicode tables cover gbk and big 5 well?
> There exists a one-to-one correspondence between GBK and Unicode ,
> for Big5 there are 7 characters which cannot be mapped one-to-one (see
> comment at top of ); thee of which appear twice in Big5 but only
> once in Unicode, two are not in unicode and there are two mapping
> In practive one can thus say: Both GBK and Big5 can be mapped to Unicode.
so, if we can make things utf deep down and remap gbk and big 5 to utf,
we can do with one set of fonts, metrics etc
i got chinese working in utf now, but need an enco table for teh special
cases (see enco-chi); when someone made me that table, i can upload an
More information about the ntg-context