W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > July to September 2016

Re: Simplified or traditional for each Chinese macrolanguage

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:04:16 +0900
To: Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
CC: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, 董福興 <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, Makoto Kato <m_kato@ga2.so-net.ne.jp>, 劉慶 <ryukeikun@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c1e56205-2cc4-6b04-92cc-e4c2bc18f7c9@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
On 2016/07/27 12:34, Xidorn Quan wrote:

> If we use Wikipedia as the criterion, the list would significantly
> change. Basically as far as I can see, Wikipedia uses Traditional
> Chinese in almost every Chinese languages it has a version for. But I
> suspect that most of those Wikipedia are built by language enthusiasts,
> and not used by people in general, so I tend not to pick that as a
> criterion.

I seem to remember that Wikipedia had a system for transforming between 
the two writing conventions (which I know is not easy, but I think it 
included special markup to disambiguate characters that needed to be 
disambiguated in only one variant). But I wasn't able to find any 
control for this.

Regards,   Martin.
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2016 04:05:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 26 October 2016 23:39:18 UTC