Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

As well how Chinese/Japanese post offices handle addresses written with
sinograms for personal names ? Is the expanded IDS form acceptable for
them, or do they require using Romanized addresses, or phonetic
approximations (Bopomofo in China, Kanas in Japan, Hangul in Korea) ?

2018-03-09 2:17 GMT+01:00 Philippe Verdy <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr>:

> This still leaves the question about how to write personal names !
> IDS alone cannot represent them without enabling some "reasonable"
> ligaturing (they don't have to match the exact strokes variants for optimal
> placement, or with all possible simplifications).
> I'm curious to know how China, Taiwan, Singapore or Japan handle this (for
> official records or in banks): like our personal signatures (as digital
> images), and then using a simplified official record (including the
> registration of romanized names)?
>
> 2018-03-09 0:06 GMT+01:00 Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
> unicode at unicode.org>:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 09:42:38 +0800
>> via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
>>
>> > to the best of my knowledge virtually no new characters used just for
>> > names are under consideration, all the ones that are under
>> > consideration are from before this century.
>>
>> What I was interested in was the rate of generation of new
>> CJK characters in general, not just those for names.  I appreciate that
>> encoding is dominated by the backlog of older characters.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180309/1a6d07d2/attachment.html>