Re: [idn] Question for the Kanji & Hanja cognosentee

["Bruce Thomson" <bthomson@fm-net.ne.jp>]

Yes, that's fine.

Bruce

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <liana.ydisg@juno.com>
To: <bthomson@fm-net.ne.jp>
Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] Question for the Kanji & Hanja cognosentee


> One Kanji to one unique ACE, is this good enough?
> That is you do not allow one Kanji has several
> ACE, such as Kanji to Romaji case. Is this correct?
> 
> Liana
> 
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:28:44 +0900 "Bruce Thomson"
> <bthomson@fm-net.ne.jp> writes:
> > Right. There should be no folding between Kanji and
> > other forms, as it is not even possible to do it well
> > by table lookup.
> > 
> > Also, in my opinion there should be no folding
> > amongst the two types of kana and Romaji either,
> > even it could be done easily enough. This might be
> > controversial, as the fastidious Bank of Japan
> > demonstrated by registering over twenty forms
> > of its name in the .com testbed (Kanji, hiragana,
> > katakana, for .com, .net, and .org, in addition to
> > the Romaji names registered previously.)
> > 
> > Bruce
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <liana.ydisg@juno.com>
> > To: <duerst@w3.org>
> > Cc: <liana.ydisg@juno.com>; <lsb@postel.co.kr>; 
> > <bthomson@fm-net.ne.jp>;
> > <idn@ops.ietf.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2001 3:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: [idn] Question for the Kanji & Hanja cognosentee
> > 
> > 
> > > So for Kanji shall be handled like Chinese character,
> > > which means each shall be treated as an icon with
> > > itsown independency? Am I right?
> > >
> > > Liana
> > >
> > > On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:24:10 +0900 Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org> 
> > writes:
> > > > At 00:54 01/08/17 -0700, liana.ydisg@juno.com wrote:
> > > > >If Hangul mapped to Latin letters like Romaji and then
> > > > >add a number to select one Kanji among a few
> > > > >homophones, can this be good enough to idnetify a Hanja
> > > > >name in DNS?
> > > > >
> > > > >The same question goes to Bruce Thomson:
> > > > >Can Romaji be revered back to Kanji-Kana sequece with
> > > > >near 100% rate (with or without case ending)?
> > > >
> > > > Not at all. There are some cases where you can guess,
> > > > and there are cases where even guessing won't really
> > > > help. Of course adding a number or so always will be
> > > > able to do disambiguation, but one would essentially
> > > > have to use a separate number per kanji, because in
> > > > Japanese, new readings can be invented anytime.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,  Martin.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> 
>