Re: utf-8 cjk translation bug?

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <address@hidden>, Dave Love <address@hidden> writes:
> Kenichi Handa <address@hidden> writes:
>>>  I also chose the boundaries to avoid breaking the region
>>>  between the mule-unicode and CJK charsets.
>> 
>>  Sorry, I don't understand the meaning of the last sentence.

> mule-unicode-2500-33ff overlaps with one of the CJK blocks.  You want
> to avoid translating the part that overlaps to mule-unicode-2500-33ff
> so that the block is displayed in a consistent font by default.  Is
> that clear?

Yes.  I see.

>>  Ah, right, they have double-width glyphs for those chars.
>>  But, I think there are still many those who are not using
>>  the recent XFree86, or who have not installed those fonts.

> I would have expected them to have iso10646 fonts if they are using
> utf-8 (for the sake of applications other than Emacs) but maybe that
> isn't the case.  You are obviously in a better position than I am to
> decide the right thing.

"using utf-8" means many things.  If they are using utf-8
locale, I think they surely have those fonts.  But, as far
as I know, ja_JP.UTF-8 is still not that popular in Japan.
And, even in ja_JP.eucJP locale, people occasionally have to
use utf-8 file for many reasons.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
address@hidden