- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 08:16:43 +0100
- To: Angel Li <angel@w3.org>, 'chen-zhuang' <chenzh-zhuang@163.com>
- CC: 'Yijun Chen' <ethantw@me.com>, 'Xiaoqian Cindy Wu' <xiaoqian@w3.org>, 'Bobby Tung' <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>, '慶 劉' <ryukeikun@me.com>, 'public-zhreq' <public-zhreq@w3.org>
On 01/04/2015 07:13, Angel Li wrote: > +1 to Hanzi if we already have a related national standard stating that. > To make it more clear for a broader community, maybe we should add a paragraph of rational on what do we mean by Hanzi. I'm not sure why we are trying to change the English language. 'Han characters' is the common English way of referring to hanzi (or 'ideographic characters', but that is slightly inaccurate). If we use 'hanzi', people will wonder if this has some different meaning than the term 'Han characters', which they know. (And by the way, very very few people will actually know how to pronounce it properly.) If we mean the same thing as 'Han character', why introduce something different? So is there a particular, practical reason to use hanzi rather than Han character? ri
Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2015 07:17:10 UTC