6 ms·
I don't think Han unification is as evil as people make it out to be: the characters that got unified do share the same semantic meaning across languages, where
by vore 3y ago
I don't think Han unification is as evil as people make it out to be: the characters that got unified do share the same semantic meaning across languages, whereas Latin vs Cyrillic there is no semantic equivalence since letters are purely orthographic glyphs. The thing that sucks is that there's no real inline way (variation selectors, kind of) to select the language for the CJK glyph.
- sirn 3y ago> the characters that got unified do share the same semantic meaning across languages It doesn't in practice. For example: 机 in Japanese means "table", while the same codepoint in Simplified Chinese means "machine" (i.e. 機 in Japanese).
- vore 3y agoFor that example, in Chinese 机 is an alternative orthography of 几 (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9C%BA#Etymology_2 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9C%BA#Etymology_2) as in e.g. 茶几 – it's not perfect, but language is messy and I don't think Unicode did the worst job of a messy situation.