[Fwd]: Response to Mark's message]
duerst at w3.org
Thu Apr 10 16:14:16 CEST 2003
At 23:46 03/04/09 +0100, Michael Everson wrote:
>Remember, the *script* is Hani. We would be encoding TWO script variants
>in 15924. Now that in itself is unusual. Compare Latn/Latg/Latf. The thing
>is that Latn is still used by itself, but if we have Hant/Hans then what
>function will Hani have?
I could imagine jp-Hani to be used for current-day Japanese, as
opposed to jp-Latn (romanized Japanese) or jp-Hant (Japanese before
the writing reform after WWII). I don't think jp-Hans would be
appropriate for current-day Japanese, because there are quite
some differences between the Japanese and the Chinese simplifications,
and Japanese simplifications don't go as far as the Chinese ones.
More information about the Ietf-languages