This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a
WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to
writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by
the project page and/or leave a query at
the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
computers,
computing, and
information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
To me the plural form makes more sense and I believe it is even required on en.WP, see
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals)#Exceptions ("Articles on groups or classes of specific things"; the character desciption languages presented here are highly specific and clearly distinct.). But if we decide to retain the singular we will need to rewrite the first sentence to something like "A Chinese character description language is one of several proposed languages ..."Love —
LiliCharlie (
talk)
18:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Section
Ideographic Description Sequences currently says: “These sequences [...] do not include detailed information about the locations and shapes of strokes. They do not, by themselves, provide enough information for an actual rendering of a character being described.” Although that text repeats itself, it does not provide enough information to the reader to be of any help. I'm not even sure if it's true. It certainly isn't for the given example, nor for any other example I can think of, including more complex ones such as “⿰扌⿱宀叉”. Can anyone provide an example of a character that can not be adequately rendered? ◄
Sebastian11:05, 8 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Let me first say that
Unicode IDS's are not intended for rendering characters. The
current standard says that "the reader can then create a mental picture of the ideographs from the description... In particular, support for the characters in the Ideographic Description block does not require the rendering engine to recreate the graphic appearance of the described character." — Also note the
Equivalence section further down in the standard which says that "ideographs can be described in more than one way" using IDS's.
An example of identical IDS's for different characters is ⿱十一; this represents both 土 and 士. Another one is ⿴囗一 for 日 and 曰. That is to say, IDS's have no mechanism for dealing with relative size and, errr..., horizontal and vertical "distortion" of character components. Nor is it possible to express where exactly components intersect (⿻) or if the touch.
Love —
LiliCharlie (
talk)
23:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)reply
I feel like this is some stealth marketing thing - there's no actual specification available when you go looking for it.... just software you can buy. --
TheSeer (
Talkˑ
Contribs)
14:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)reply
In most parts of Asia, and therefore potentially 60% of the world in terms of population, "institute" is a legally reserved word meaning "educational institution" and so cannot be used to describe software companies which offer no educational courses. Therefore it is misleading to not to include the full name "Wenlin Institute, Inc" (which is used on wenlin.com).
AfD?
This article once described five languages.
User:Remsense has deleted three of the five as "non-notable"; has cut the once-detailed description of one of the two remaining languages down to a single short paragraph, removing an image and multiple references; and seems intent on erasing the name of the other remaining language. Since IDSes are already covered in detail in an article of their own, CDL's description in this article is now reduced almost to nothing, and some other users (above, on this talk page) think CDL may also be non-notable and worthy of complete removal, I have to wonder: should this article about the general concept of character description languages exist at all? If CDL is removed, then only IDS will remain on the list - and it'll be listed without its name, if that stands. It doesn't seem like we really need an article about a general concept of which we will eventually only admit one example, which already has a "main" article of its own anyway. The small amount of material about IDS that is in this article and not in the "main" article, could easily be moved over.
2607:FEA8:1280:5D00:0:0:0:4DB1 (
talk)
02:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This article seems about the concept, which seems to me to be notable. I can think of a few examples that aren't yet included from earlier in the 20th century that I need to get around to adding.
Remsense诉09:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
There are several more listed in the literature review of the Skala paper cited at the end of the IDS section. However, I'm not sure they are any more notable than the ones you've deleted.
2607:FEA8:1280:5D00:0:0:0:F7F0 (
talk)
16:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply