Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 18:59:42 -0700 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=) To: jhs@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Chinese/Korean liasions wanted Message-ID: <199504090159.SAA03488@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199504062325.BAA06954@vector.eikon.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> (message from Julian Howard Stacey on Fri, 07 Apr 1995 01:25:05 %2B0200)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* > I assume these are GB tools? * Yup some of old fashioned taiwanese chinese, * & some of newer mainland chinese (the docs say Mao's arm didnt stretch * to the island when he forced the mainland to rationalise (mainly strip * the character set back a bit) Now you've got me all confused. ;) I always thought GB = Simplified, and Big5 = Traditional. Are you saying GB = Taiwanese/Mandarin, Big5 = Cantonese? Well, whatever. Is it ok to classify them by code systems (chinese-gb & chinese-b5), or do we need to further divide GB into Taiwanese and Mandarin? (?_?) * Ill clean & dump it in ~jhs/chinese on freefall Thanks...I'll take a look.... Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504090159.SAA03488>