Re: Re: Status of Big5 and extensions

[Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>]

On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:31:07AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:50:57AM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> > * Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx> [2013-08-08 00:30:35 -0400]:
> > > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 05:53:21AM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> > > > note that
> > > > C87A, C87C, C8A4 are mapped to 2xxxx in hkscs
> > > > (old hkscs pua codes agree with uao)
> > > 
> > > OK, so is this non-conflicting?
> > > 
> > 
> > i just wanted to note that these are the only codes
> > in the 89x157 table that map to non-16bit unicode
> > codepoints
> > 
> > there is no conflict
> 
> OK, great. I think rather than using any fancy tables for the 89x157
> grid and HKSCS, we can just special-case these two in the code.
> 
> It also looks to me like HKSCS and UAO are essentially non-conflicting
> in the 89x157 grid once you remove PUA junk; the only real conflict is
> the half-width kana UAO mapped over part of HKSCS. So it may make
> sense to just add all the extended mappings in this range except the
> kana to the base Big5 table. This would definitely simplify HKSCS
> support. If we later want UAO support, this range could just be
> special-cased algorithmically since it seems to be direct range
> mappings to Unicode.

It seems this sort of unification has been attempted already, and it
looks like it largely succeeded. See:

http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-April/035330.html

Rich