Re: emacs, ??????????

[Thomas Chan <thomas@atlas.datexx.com>]

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 zw@zhaoway.com wrote:

> ÃD¥~¸Ü,­è­è§Ú¤Sµ¹¦Û¤vªº¦n©_¤ßµ¹´c¤ß¤F,¤£¹L§Ú¤]­É¦¹¾÷·|©ú¥Õ¤F
> ¬°¤°»ò¤j³°ªº GB2312 ­n¦n¹L Big5, ¤ñ¦p GB2312 ¸Ì­±¨S¦³ ¤û¹G
> ªº bi ¦r, Big5 ¸Ì­±«o¦³³o­ÓŦ¦r... «u, ±z¥i¤d¸U§O¥h¸Õ°Ú,±z
> ª¾¹D´Nª¾¹D,¤£ª¾¹D´Nºâ¤F,§Ú¥i¤£Ä@·N§â±zµ¹´c¤ß¤F... :)
> 
> ¤£¹L GB2312 ÁÙ¬O¤£°÷§¹¬ü,¤ñ¦pGB2312¸Ì­±ÁÙ¦³ ³¾ ¦r,³o­Ó¦r¦b
> Window ¸Ì­±ÁÙ¨S¦³µ¹¹LÂo±¼, ¤£¹L³o¸Ì¤S±o»¡»¡ Debian ªº¦n¤F,
> XCIN ªº«÷­µ¿é¤Jªk¸Ì­±´N¨S¦³³o­Ó¦r.¹ê¦b¬O¦n°Ú,¥H«á©Ò¦³¥Î¤W
> Debian ªºªB¤Í³£¤£·|»¡Å¦¸Ü¤F,¥L·Q»¡ Diao, ¤]°¦¯à»¡ ³¾.¦h¦n!
> ¤£µMªº¸Ü,§Ú¤]·Q file a bug report ¤F, ... :)

I'm not sure which "diao" you want to say--is it U+5C4C (Big5's CE78; not 
in GB2312) or HKSCS's 8B4D (not in Big5, GB2312, nor Unicode 3.0; looks
like men2 'door' and xiao3 'little')? :)

But even Unicode 3.0 does not have HKSCS's 8AE3, 8B4D, 8B4E, nor 8B4F (but
it does have 8B50 as U+95AA).  I guess one can rank the "dirtyness" as:
GB2312 < Big5 < {GBK, Unicode 3.0} < Big5HKSCS. :)


Thomas Chan
tc31@cornell.edu