請還原Tradition Chinese的眞正Tradition寫法

[GoogleCodeExporter]

正體(繁體)中文所用的寫法，個人認為大有問題。從圖例顯示
，寫法是向台灣敎育部靠攏。然而，使用正體中文的地區有��
�多，如香港、澳門和海外華僑等，其他地區並不以台灣寫法�
��尚。此外，即使在台灣，過去舊日的書刊出版，乃至今天的
報章，主要使用的也不是敎育部寫法。大家主要使用的，是��
�去傳統字書裏的正體寫法，有人稱作「舊字形」，日本朋友�
��叫「康熙字典體」——不是指某款遭濫用的字型，而是指參
照同文書局原版的《康熙字典》每字字頭之寫法。這種寫法��
�一來有充份字理，二來在字型美學上也較美觀。至於台灣敎�
��部寫法，則以楷書寫法，來強行扭曲明體、黑體等印版字型
，既缺乏字理，也不夠美觀，已有不少人詬病。在下由衷感��
�　Adobe的貢獻，但極望　Adobe能把正體中文的字型，改回眞正
正統的《康熙字典》寫法（即「舊字形」），而不是台灣以��
�寫楷書扭曲黑體的寫法。不勝銘感！

我不反對有台灣人想用台灣敎育部的寫法，但最最最最低限��
�，也應還其他Tradition 
Chinese使用者，使用眞正Tradition寫法的空間，分拆開「Taiwan」�
��「Tradition」兩體。而不是強迫其他正體使用者依從台灣那種
以楷扭曲黑的寫法。

Original issue reported on code.google.com by syaoranh...@gmail.com on 16 Jul 2014 at 7:49

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Additionally, there is also Hong Kong "standard" for Tradition Chinese (List of 
Graphemes of Commonly-used Chinese Characters).
ref. https://crc.edb.gov.hk/crchome/en/26.asp

However, at this stage, there may be a issue about mixing different CJK 
characters: the   variant is not consist thought whole paragraphs. 

Original comment by KurenaiR...@gmail.com on 16 Jul 2014 at 1:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by roozbeh@google.com on 16 Jul 2014 at 6:05

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

舊字形或日稱「康熙字典體」主要適用於宋體，若將舊字型��
�接搬入黑體，亦會影响美觀。諷刺地，舊字形在本港報章及�
��物反而不及台灣般普遍，香港報章主要使用《香港電腦漢字
楷體字形參考指引》。

然而，本人亦認同應將 Noto (Traditional 
Chinese)分拆開。台灣敎育部既並非惟一標準，更非廣為接納之
標準，以此為正，極之不尊重台港澳使用者。

[Translation]
The "KangXi forms" referred to are more suitable for Song/Ming writing styles 
(read: serif for Western terminology).  If these serif strokes are used 
transferred in Noto, which is a Hei font (read: sans-serif), it would equally 
deteriorate the nature and feel of the font. Ironically, these KangXi forms are 
actually not as commonly used in Hong Kong; In general, all Hong Kong's 
newspapers and most printed books use fonts that adhere to "Guidelines on 
Character Glyphs for Chinese Computer Systems" by the Hong Kong Chinese 
Language Interface Advisory Committee (CLIAC) instead.

However, I still agree that Noto (Traditional Chinese) should be split up.  
Taiwan MOE is not the only standard, nor is it the widely accepted standard.  
Using Taiwan MOE glyphs and proclaiming it as "Traditional Chinese" is a 
downright disrespect to Taiwanese, Hong Kong and Macau users.

Original comment by henry.fa...@gmail.com on 17 Jul 2014 at 12:09

[GoogleCodeExporter]

About Traditional Chinese in Taiwan:
One reason to conform to Taiwan Ministry of Education standard for glyphs in 
Big5 character set is that it is what students learn in elementary school. This 
font minimizes confusions when they start to use computers.

About Traditional Chinese in Hong Kong and Macao:
Please report specific characters of the font that you see inconsistent with 
daily use. It'd be great if you can refer to the Hong Kong standards and/or 
unicode chart.

Original comment by ping...@google.com on 17 Jul 2014 at 5:30

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It is unfortunate that the HB-source of the unicode chart actually uses the 
glyphs specified in a document prepared by a Taiwanese organisation 
(http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr38/ - kIRG_HSource - Computer Chinese Glyph 
and Character Code Mapping Table) and thus are not the correct representations 
of that specified in the relevant standards mandated by the Education Bureau 
and the guideline published by OGCIO of Hong Kong SAR.

One major inconsistency (and very probably the reason for the existence of Hong 
Kong's separate standard from Taiwan) is due to the 月/肉 component.  For 
words which are related to flesh and have the 月 at the bottom (e.g. 胃臂), 
in Hong Kong the first stroke is straight down and the innards are two 
horizontal lines.  For Taiwan, the first stroke bends to the left and the 
innards are a dot down and the horizontal slant up.  Such a variation is 
particularly (un)appealing to the eyes.  Another well known difference is 茲 
and 兹.  When 茲 is used as the component, in Hong Kong standard the word 
form does not change.  However, in Taiwan, the 茲 component changes into 兹 
when being in part of another word.  Third, for 次, in Hong Kong a dot down 
and horizontal slash up is used.  However, in Taiwan, two parallel strokes are 
used.  Fourth, in Hong Kong, for the word 育, we write and see the exact glyph 
that is used in the Noto Sans SC.  These differences are particularly annoying 
to the user, especially that these affect legibility on small screens (for 月, 
the strokes get blurred, the two strokes for 次 get squished up).

FYI, historically, 月 has always been written in two horizontal strokes in 
both serif and regular script (sans-serif did not exist until very modern 
times).  The standard mandated by the Taiwan MOE was very controversial and 
hence this has also caused people to call for different outcomes: complete 
abolishment of the standard and reverting to the (modernized version of) KangXi 
form, or the separate standard (Hong Kong).  In Hong Kong, primary schools and 
secondary schools are required to use the Hong Kong standards.  However, 
enforcement has been relatively lax compared to Taiwan and mainland China.  
However, it is still not acceptable to use certain MOE "created" word forms, 
such as the slant/dot/slope at the bottom for 月, the protusion of the last 
slant for 致, nor the three stroke top component for the word 育.

There are also many comparisons specified in the wikipedia article at 
"http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hk/%E5%B8%B8%E7%94%A8%E5%AD%97%E5%AD%97%E5%BD%A2%E8%
A1%A8".  That list is nowhere exhaustive either.

It would be technically infeasible to create separate glyphs in the fonts.  
Thus I am in favor of correctly naming the font as Noto Sans (Taiwan) instead 
of Noto Sans (Traditional Chinese).  Whether or not effort is put into making a 
separate font that adheres to the Hong Kong Standard is another issue.

Original comment by henry.fa...@gmail.com on 17 Jul 2014 at 7:09

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by xian...@google.com on 11 Feb 2015 at 7:12

• Changed state: Accepted

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Interestingly Enough, the Noto Sans Korean font has a very traditional glyph 
style and should be acceptable (albeit somewhat quaint) for people who do not 
like the Noto Sans Traditional Chinese glyphs. I personally prefer Noto Sans 
Korean the most as well. However, it is still different from the commonly used 
Hong Kong standard, but again, whether or not they'll put effort into making a 
separate font to adhere to that is a separate issue. But for now I think there 
should be a way to make it more convenient for Hong Kong etc overseas users to 
use the Korean glyphs. I currently am using the "CJK with Korean glyphs as the 
default" packages, however the problem with this is that some programs are 
smart enough and can tell that the text is in Traditional Chinese and will 
switch to the "Noto Sans Traditional Chinese" glyphs despite the fact that I 
don't want them to do this. Only installing the Korean regional specific font 
is not a solution because it is missing many glyphs that are needed in Chinese, 
especially for Hong Kong usage. If only I could find a way to go into the 
NotoSansCJKkr otf files and remove the unwanted glyphs or set the Korean glyphs 
to have a traditional Chinese language code that would work as well, but I 
don't know how to do this.

Original comment by ryga...@gmail.com on 27 Feb 2015 at 8:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Check progress on the HK experimental font in this bug:
https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-han-sans/issues/48

Original comment by xian...@google.com on 21 Apr 2015 at 6:17