You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 25, 2023. It is now read-only.
To clarify, there are certain standards and common practices on how Traditional
Chinese should be rendered. The glyphs used in Noto (Traditional Chinese) are
those set by the Taiwan MOE (hereby refered as "Taiwan Standard"). There also
exists two other standards in Hong Kong, called 常用字字形表 (hereby
refered as "HKEDB Standard") and 香港電腦漢字字形參考指引 (hereby
refered as "HKCLIAC Guideline").
In Hong Kong, the Taiwan standard is basically unused and criticized for being
decorative and non-standard
("其字形設計多從美觀角度出發,字形的筆畫往往未見標準"),
and incorrect and affecting students' proper learning of Chinese
("讓學生接觸一些筆畫有誤的漢字,阻礙教師教授正確的漢字
字形和筆順,影響學生學習標準的字形結構").
The HKEDB Standard is mandated in all approved primary and secondary Chinese
textbooks (parallel to the MOE standard in Taiwan). It is also in use for many
Hong Kong road signages and government published materials.
The HKCLIAC guideline is a extension of the HKEDB standard to cover the whole
Unicode CJK block; however there exists certain discrepancies to that mandated
by the HKEDB standard. Most printed Chinese materials, especially circulating
newspapers, use fonts that adhere to the HKCLIAC guidelines instead.
However, both the HKEDB standard and the HKCLIAC guideline differ vastly from
the MOE standard to the extent for many common words, the glyphs resemble to
the standard mandated by the People's Republic of China or the glyphs in use by
Japan.
It is very disrespectful to cherry-pick on a single standard in use in
Traditional Chinese areas, and name fonts that suggest they are fit for use in
that area. Please correctly name Noto (Traditional Chinese) as Noto (Taiwan).
--
It would be better if a Noto (Hong Kong) font were produced, however that is a
separate issue.
Please note, this is a separate issue from issue 42. Issue 42 advocates the
restoration of glyphs to the former KangXi style mandated by the Qing Dynasty.
According to issue 42, these glyphs are in use in printed materials and
newspapers. I can also confirm that books from Taiwan use these glyphs as
well. Ironically, fonts that employ the KangXi style are virtually non-existent
in commercial contexts, especially on newspapers, in Hong Kong.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by henry.fa...@gmail.com on 17 Jul 2014 at 11:50
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
henry.fa...@gmail.com
on 17 Jul 2014 at 11:50The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: