- From: Mingye Wang <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 10:19:34 -0700
- To: whatwg/encoding <encoding@noreply.github.com>
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:23:38 UTC
> Given that no browser implements gb18030 like that I don't see why we should change this. Newer Pan-CJK font families like Adobe's [Source Han Sans](https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-han-sans) (lead by @kenlunde) decide to go with Unicode instead of GB 10830-flavored Unicode. > I'm also somewhat reluctant to add a note, since as far as I can tell this is just someone's opinion Dr. Ken "Someone" Lunde (again!) is among the editors of [UAX 38 Unihan](http://unicode.org/reports/tr38/) database, and has very extensive participation of many CJK-related standardization processes in Unicode. > and those maintaining gb18030 have not decided to care. The Chinese SAC has decided not to care about a lot of things including their translations of ANSI C and Unicode. But this doesn't mean that the Chinese are not using C99, C11 and Unicode 9.0 -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/encoding/issues/27#issuecomment-245023092
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:23:38 UTC