I inadvertently replied off-list.
Below is my attempt to fix that with the reply from "home user" and my
response.
On 2020-02-29 06:04, home user wrote:
On 2/28/20 2:34 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 2020-02-29 05:15, home user wrote:
>> I agree with Ed that the AR PL UKai... fonts include the Roman fonts. In the
Gnome terminal (and thus vim), I use the one font for Chinese, Roman, punctuation, and
special characters (vowels with marks over them, for pinyin). I don't think
there's a way to mix the fonts. One pleasant surprise is that though the font is set
to AR PL UKai CN Book (for "simplified Chinese), the terminal seems to properly
handle "traditional" Chinese (the Taiwan script); the correct font for that
should be AR PL UKai TW Book. It's correctly handling the mix of both the
"simplified" Chinese and the "traditional" Chinese in the same file
and even in the same line.
>
> There is no way to mix fonts in a terminal.
My apologies for my bad wording. I did know that.
> The terminal is *not* handling anything when it comes to traditional v.s.
simplified.
>
> The glyphs are different and thus the Unicode is different. For example....
>
> 內 U+5167 UTF-8: 0xE5 0x85 0xA7 Traditional
> 内 U+5185 UTF-8: 0xE5 0x86 0x85 Simplified
>
> The font has included within it glyphs for both traditional and simplified. The
terminal has no involvement.
Thank-you for the correction. So why are there two separate AR PL UKai fonts - the CN
and the TW? What *is* the difference?
Well, that would require a comparison of the fonts.
However, I do know that there are terms/characters used and created in Taiwan which are
not used
in the PRC. So, it is possible that the TW font contains them and the CN not. The
reverse is also
possibly true. FWIW, the same holds true for HK.
But, I, for one won't be doing the comparison. :-)
--
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.