W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: [counter-styles] i18n-ISSUE-281: Problems with example 12

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 15:27:40 +0000
Message-ID: <5271256C.2000300@w3.org>
To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
Yup,

Here are the codes in character form, so you can see the difference:

trad	陸仟零壹
simp	陆仟零壹

Currently the table uses zh-Hans for both examples.

RI

On 30/10/2013 04:54, Phillips, Addison wrote:
> Hi Tab,
>
> Regarding:
>
>> Done, though I'm not sure what difference you think there is between
>> simplified and traditional.  Other than the negative sign, both formals are
>> identical, as are both informals.
>
> The difference is between the two formals:
>
> zh-Hant: 9678 4EDF 96F6 58F9
> zh-Hans: 9646 4EDF 96F6 58F9
>
> Notice the simplified code point (U+9646) in the second one, as compared to the traditional code point (U+9678) in the first one.
>
> Addison
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:44 PM
>> To: Richard Ishida
>> Cc: W3C Style; www International
>> Subject: Re: [counter-styles] i18n-ISSUE-281: Problems with example 12
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org> wrote:
>>> Raised by:
>>>      Richard Ishida
>>>
>>>
>>> 7.1 Longhand East Asian Counter Styles
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/css-counter-styles-3/#complex-cjk
>>> Example 12
>>>
>>> The examples of japanese-informal for 10, 11, 100, and 101 are
>>> incorrect - there should be no 一 (digit one) on the left.
>>>
>>> Same for the hanja-informal.
>>>
>>> The hanja-informal also uses the wrong symbol for zero (should be the
>>> han character rather than the hangul character.)
>>
>> Thanks, all fixed.
>>
>>> I also suggest that you include a column for 6001. This shows a
>>> difference between simplified and traditional chinese, and shows how
>>> the zeros collapse in the chinese methods.
>>
>> Done, though I'm not sure what difference you think there is between
>> simplified and traditional.  Other than the negative sign, both formals are
>> identical, as are both informals.
>>
>> ~TJ
>
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 15:28:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:35 UTC