OpenHistoricalMap

fix

Closed about 2 years ago by Lepus

Tags

• Comment from hangukhistory about 2 years ago

  Please stop writing Korean city names by the chinese characters on the Name parameter. We don't write like that and can't read it.

• Comment from Lepus about 2 years ago

  Historically, Chinese characters have been officially used on the Korean Peninsula. It was not until modern times (after 1948) that Chinese characters began to be removed. I understand that the hanja level of current Koreans is not good enough to read it, but please respect the historical writing.

• Comment from hangukhistory about 2 years ago

  I surely understand the historical background of that, but the OHM is the service for users of the present time. I think it should to be more interpretable so it couldn't make any obstacle to understand the map. It doesn't have to use sort of cuneiform for writing city names of the Mesopotamian civilization. Also, despite the history of the occupition by the UK, not used only alphabets for place names in Hong Kong / Macau, China. Now, Same as here.

• Comment from hangukhistory about 2 years ago

  There's an mistake on the last comment: "of the occupition by the UK and Portugal, respectly". I'm thankful for your interests and contributions about the Korean peninsula, as so I have been doing that. But now, this is the problem that need to consider how it is helpful for OHM users, as I think.

• Comment from Lepus about 2 years ago

  If the text used at the time is not understood by users today, I think the problem is that it can't be displayed according to the language the user is using, which shouldn't seem too difficult given that OHM uses vector rendering. OHM is not oriented to a certain country or a certain language, so it is the most neutral to use the characters used at the time as the name.
  If it can be verified, there is nothing wrong with using cuneiform to write the name of the Sumerian civilization, otherwise there is no neutral language to write it.
  The situation in Hong Kong and Macau is slightly different, although English and Portuguese are the official languages (Hong Kong added Chinese as the official language in 1970), Chinese is still widely used. A more similar situation is that the Chinese mainland released a simplified Chinese character scheme, we only use simplified Chinese characters after the release, and keep traditional Chinese characters before. Compared to Hangul which replaces Chinese characters in Korean, they are all the same language but written in different ways.

• Comment from hangukhistory about 2 years ago

  "If it can be verified": and that's the point. I'm not talking about how to be more neutral. We can't verify some ancient characters or writing system easily, even those not to be used these days. In the case of Mesopotamia, it sounds unrealistic to use cuneiforms in OHM. Alphabetic writing is dominant in many history books about that area, because it's more practical, of course. Mexian civilizations (Maya, Aztec) are in similar situation, too. You can see the name of the capital of Aztec Empire on OHM now - Tenochititlan.
  In OHM, the place names in Hong Kong are written in alphabets and Chinese characters, even before the occupation by the UK. I guess that's not a mistake, and it's useful for Hong Kong people who use the both characters. There's another example. Tibet region has their own characters that had been widely used, but it seems to be written in Chinese characters only. How about the Mongolian scripts in Yuan dynasty, and the Manchu scripts in Qing dynasty? All of them would be written only in Chinese characters, and it is. Chinese users needs them to verify those place names.
  I understand your opinion and would like to write Hanja. But not only. Korean users need Hangul to verify the old place names as ever.

• Comment from Lepus about 2 years ago

  What I mean can be verified is that there are evidences from inscriptions or that the academic circles have already made a conclusion.
  Speaking of verification, modern history, especially after the 19th century, I think such as old maps may be good first-hand information, you can directly see the location and writing of place names.
  Cuneiform is more realistic than Aztec and Maya. Sumerian-Akkadian cuneiform has been encoded by unicode and has been supported. Other scripts such as Jurchen script have not been included in unicode, but encoding proposals have been made and are under review. However, the Aztec and Mayan scripts have not yet proposed a coding scheme.
  For those bilingual place names that still existed before the British Occupation, it is obviously a bug that needs to be fixed, because they do not fill in the start date, and none of the place names can be permanent. However, these small place names may not be easy to find information to determine their start date, so they have not been corrected so far.
  Tibetan, Mongolian, and Manchu can all be used as names, but there are still very few editors in OHM, so these places are only preliminary data, and many of them need to be corrected.
  I understand that Koreans need Hangul to read directly, because it was the same when I edited Korea on OSM. But I think if both the editor and the web page can support displaying according to the user's language, then no matter what the name is filled in, it will not be an obstacle.

Log in to join the discussion