[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
针头, "pinhead" was the best Google translator could manage :)
Joe
>From: "William J. Kammerer" <wkammerer@novannet.com>
>To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
>Subject: [xml-dev] But is it fair? - An exploration of alphabets and
>ideograms
>Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 08:22:41 -0500
>
>But then is it "fair" that English requires a whopping 19 bytes to
>transmit "microencephalopathy," or even 13 bytes for the Germanic
>"pinheadedness," when there's probably an efficient ideogram or two
>(requiring only 6 to 8 bytes total) for the same concept in Chinese?
>
>William J. Kammerer
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>
>To: "'William J. Kammerer'" <wkammerer@novannet.com>;
><xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
>Sent: Friday, 04 March, 2005 07:54 AM
>Subject: RE: [xml-dev] [About Unicode] Why the symbol LOGICAL NOT is
>missing from the UCS ?
>
>
> > I can't comment on the usability of any alphabet other than Latin, but
> > is it "fair" that Chinese ideograms chew up tens of thousands of code
> > points in Unicode?
>
>It's balanced by the unfairness that Latin letters only occupy one byte
>in UTF-8, whereas Chinese ideograms occupy three or four.
>
>Michael Kay
>http://www.saxonica.com/
>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
|
