ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 N 2167
Author: Kent Karlsson
Status: Expert Contribution
Date: 2000-03-02

Comments on DPRK New Work Item proposal on Korean characters.
These are some a bit more detailed comments supplementing the Swedish NB NO vote the New Work
Item proposal from DPR of Korea, details that for brevity are not included in the vote itself.

On point 1 (and general) of JTC1/N5999:
The Hangul characters (syllables, conjoining, and compatibility letters) have assigned
code points already, and these code point assignments are being used in more andmore implementations. They cannot be changed now, since any change would cause
major disruptions with existing and now produced applications.
The Hangul character assignments were changed by amendment 5. However,changing code points a few years ago was highly unfortunate even then, even if theresult was more consistent than the original, due to that it forced incompatible changes
to implementations. Now, when there are many more implementations, any change
other than additions of characters would be very problematic. However, the change
done by amendment 5 caused simplifications to implementations, in particular that the(Unicode) canonical decomposition of Hangul syllables became easy to express
algorithmically.
But doing any changes now to already assigned code points is very far from being
acceptable.
On point 2:
Please see Unicode technical report 10 and ISO/IEC DIS 14651, for methods for
tailoring of the ordering of Hangul Jamo and Hangul syllables well as compatibility
forms (nominal, half-width, circled, and parenthesised Hangul letters). Note howvarious compatibility forms of the same Hangul Jamo letter are ordered "close" to eachother, despite them having quite "far distant" code points.
Nearly none of the scripts covered by the UCS can be ordered culturally correct just byordering by code point value. For CJK Unified Ideographs and for Hangul Syllables,code point order can be used. But tailoring of the ordering can be applied also to CJKideographs and Hangul. A tailoring, or delta, for ordering Hangul (for comparison, andultimately sorting) in the way the New Work Item proposal suggests can be given
without changing any code point to character allocations.
By using the methods of UTR 10 and ISO/IEC 14651, one can get any ordering
desired for the Hangul Jamo, implying a corresponding ordering of the Hangul
1syllables. The effort of reordering Hangul characters should be directed at creating
one or several tailoring(s) of the 14651 Common Template Table, tailorings that aresuitable for Hangul.
Note that such tailorings are needed e.g. also for the Latin script (several differenttailorings), and for the Japanese scripts (to take the length mark into account).
On point 3:
See text regarding Annex B below.
On point 4:
Adding cross-references to KPS 9566-97 in 10646 itself is not needed. However,North Korea could provide a machine-readable mapping table (like those found on theUnicode web site) for mapping KPS 9566-97 encoded data into 10646 encoded data
(and back). There are many encodings for which 10646 itself does not give any crossmapping. Even the cross-mappings given in 10646 for CJK ideographs are somewhat
misplaced, and should ideally have been given elsewhere.
A machine-readable mapping table is much more helpful than having the mapping
information printed in the 10646 document (or any other document which is not easily
machine readable for data extraction).
On point 5:
Character name changes for already assigned characters cannot be accepted. Itwould cause problems for numerous implementations. And, as far as we know, theterm Hangul is the accepted name of the script, in both North and South Korea as wellas in the rest of the world. Furthermore, it is not true that the name of "national"
characters bears the name of "their" nation. For example "Katakana", "Hebrew", "Yi".
These are used mostly, though like for Hangul not exclusively, in only one nation. But
they do not bear the name of that nation.
On Annex A:(K+ below refers to the North Korean proposal.)
Initial consonants:
1. Two existing characters appear not to be covered by the proposal:
U+1134 and U+1146.
2. 6 "new" characters are proposed K+1113, K+1114, K+1117, K+1120,

2

K+1128, and K+112A. 4 of these APPEAR to be glyph
variants of existing characters, while one is brand new (K+1117),and one is a new combination (K+1128).
3. It is not clear if K+1157 is the same as U+1145 or not.
Given the new names as well as the glyph change, adifference may be intended.
4. Some of the glyphs used in the North Korean proposal appear
to be more in the Hangul typographic style, than those in theUnicode charts (in particular those for U+113C-U+1140, U+1146,
and U+114E-U+1151; but also for U+114C, which currently has
too little distinction from U+110B in our eyes). There aresome other glyph differences as well (like for U+1110),but can only guess that that is only glyph differences.
Middle vowels:
1. Three existing characters appear not to be covered by the North Korean
proposal: U+118B, U+1192, and U+1197.
2. 7 new characters appear to be proposed: K+1180, K+1184,
K+1186, K+118B, K+118D, K+118E, and K+1193.
3. Again there are some glyph differences, especiallyrelated to how sub-letters join.
Final consonants:
1. Here there appears to be only rearrangement and some example
glyph differences (some of which should be considered forthe "typical" glyphs in the Unicode/10646 charts).
The rearrangement and renaming of Hangul Jamo characters is of course
unacceptable at this time. Many implementations depend on the existing names andallocations for Hangul Jamo characters.
To exclude already assigned characters is also unacceptable.
The possible glyph improvements should be considered further by someone familiar
with Hangul. North Korea could provide specifics about which "typical" glyphs should
be changed, and why.
Apparently, 7 new initial consonants are proposed, as well as 7 new middle vowels.
These need to be considered further by someone familiar with Hangul. Since these3

apparently are historic, not modern, Hangul characters, historic documents need beproduced that show the use of each proposed new Hangul Jamo.
On Annex B:
1. Part of this appears to suggest a rearrangement of theHangul Compatibility Jamo (U+3130-U+318F). Collation ordertailoring techniques should be used to get the ordering desired,not code point changes.
2. Another bit suggests other characters, some of which
would have compatibility decompositions. Some ofthe suggested characters already exist in the UCS.
3. Part of this even suggest having special characters forsome (2) names of North Korean political significance,plus the logo of a party (twice). Logos and personal names
are not acceptable as characters.
A small number of the characters suggested in Annex B may merit furtherconsideration. But not those that would have compatibility decompositions (inUnicode), and/or are names/logos, or those that already are in the UCS (like quotation
marks, the vulgar fractions, some of the arrows, and the compatibility Jamo) should
not be included into the UCS.
On Annex C:
The character name changes are unacceptable. The names are normative and mustnot be changed (even if wrong). However, these names can, non-normatively, betranslated into other languages, and errors may then be corrected.
The rearrangement of code point/character assignments is unacceptable. However,
tailoring the collation ordering of the Hangul Jamo character should imply acorresponding collation order reordering of the syllable characters.
Furthermore, the suggested syllables rearrangement looses simple algorithmic
decomposition even in reference to the New Work Item proposal’s proposal for Hangul
Jamo.

Summary:4

1. The glyph changes, for the example glyphs, for some
(historic) Hangul Jamo characters need be considered bypeople familiar with the Hangul script, especially historical
Hangul. No new work item is needed for this.
2. Some of the "new" Hangul Jamo characters suggested need beconsidered further by people familiar with the Hangul script,
especially historical Hangul. Examples from historic documents
need to be provided if any of these characters are to be accepted.
No new work item is needed for this.
3. Some of the "miscellaneous" characters suggested in annex B
may be considered further. Some of them are already underconsideration as math symbols. No new work item is neededfor this.
4. Cross references between 10646 and KPS 9566-97 (except forthings that are not accepted into 10646) should be provided
separately in a machine readable file. No new work item isneeded for this.
5. A tailoring of the 14651 CTT to suit the desired ordering ofHangul characters could be provided by DPRK (as a nationalStandard, if desired). However, such a tailoring is out of scopefor 10646 itself.
-------------------------------------end of N2167----------------------------------

5