Dear colleagues, I am circulating the attempt I made before LA to answer the points raised in this morning’s meeting. I don’t think there is any major change to the answers I gave. I am looking for cases where variants are likely to be created in the LGR (I know it’s several files) as a result of two characters being simplified to the same character in a language. For example 發 ‘send’ and 髮 ‘hair’ in TC both became 发 in SC, and so all three (plus Japanese 発 and probably some rare characters) become variants, but cause almost no trouble as no known word has ‘send’ where another word has ‘hair’. Unless we discover a large number of troublesome cases, the Procedure will work. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon> From: Dillon, Chris Sent: 06 October 2014 13:34 To: Wang Wei; ChineseGP@icann.org Subject: Re: [ChineseGP] 转发: ICANN 51 IDN Presentation - KGP Dear Professor Kim, Wang Wei and colleagues, I thought I would have a try at answering the questions. I hope it’s helpful. Regards, Chris. == S[slide]3: The example is an interesting one as the difficult characters are used in situations where U4E00 一 may cause confusion e.g. Banknotes. S4 Professor Zhang’s thoughts on what is a character (同源 etc., same sound/meaning/form) are relevant here. Q11 No, as the mappings at LGR level need to be the same. Yes, as the most liberal mapping (in this case CN) needs to be used when the local tables are different. If this causes large variant sets, more difficult individual solutions may be necessary. Q12 Yes. As long as the mappings are merged in the most liberal way. Q13 No. As the most liberal mapping needs to be used. Q14 Yes; it is a possible scenario. Although if 壹 were blocked in all the local tables, it could not have been registered. S8 1.2 Yes; there can be a single mapping. Compromises may be necessary if large variant sets are created. 1.3 No, each language/script can’t have its own mapping, but can have its own dispositions. No; I can’t think of one. Any suggestions? Q21 Under the P2.1 procedure, I think the KGP needs to be set up first and then have its proposal approved. Q22 The CN LGR is certainly at an advanced stage. S15 The JGP does seem to be saying that Old Character Forms and New Character Forms are not variants. I am not sure whether the JGP considers them separate characters. They are certainly not universally variants as with SC and TC. However, I have argued elsewhere that in individual names it is common for a name to prefer an Old Character Form as with 紀伊國屋 and 紀伊国屋. I call these lexical variants, as they only occur in certain names and could not happen if they were separate characters. S14 Note that on slide 3 KR has 壹 and 壱 as variants. I guess we do need to think more about the character level than the word level, although admittedly large number of examples may affect our thinking as with 紀伊國屋. I welcome corrections and additions. Regards, Chris. == Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon