# CJK and bold tags \*\* possibly complex issue? **URL:** \ **Category:** Uncategorized\ **Created:** [December 15, 2021, 6:30pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034 "2021-12-15T18:30:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Roger](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/roger/32/2381_2.png) [@Roger](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/Roger)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 6:30pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/1 "2021-12-15T18:30:28Z")
There is a previous thread from 2020: > [@Bold failure in Chinese sentence, because of the usage of Chinese punctuation is different from English](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/bold-failure-in-chinese-sentence-because-of-the-usage-of-chinese-punctuation-is-different-from-english/3478): > > I met bold error, may caused by the usage of Chinese punctuation is different from English. Here are some examples: Error: \*\*水温适度。\*\*水的温度与室温相同，可以有效的减少对胃肠道的刺激，白开水具有生物活性，可以透过细胞膜促进人体的新陈代谢。 \*\*水温适度。\*\*水的温度与室温相同，可以有效的减少对胃肠道的刺激，白开水具有生物活性，可以透过细胞膜促进人体的新陈代谢。 In Chinese punctuation, No spaces are required between Chinese punctuation marks and subsequent sentences. So the following wording does not meet the standard: \*\*水温适度。\*\* 水的温度与室温相同，可以有效的减少对胃肠道的刺激，白开水具有生物活性，可以透过细胞膜促进人体的新陈代谢。 水温适度。 水的温度与室温相同，可以有效的减少对… This highlights the case I run into in present. As background: I’m dealing primarily with Chinese, Japanese and Arabic but with people on the team from each respective area, and they are fortunately fluent in my native language or English. So, in the case of zh-CHT in markdown (traditional Chinese), per what I understand in the Commonmark spec, the below will fail to output properly: ` **「在進，** 進MORE CHINESE CHARACTERS HERE 。」` I.e. Asterisks will render. In the case of: ` **「我『12個』。** 進MORE CHINESE CHARACTERS HERE」 ─` This renders, just fine. They are slightly different cases. The above mentioned post chain seems to be addressing or speaking to the same issue. I’m unsure if their was a handling I’m not seeing in the spec OR if there is something needed by the community which I could assist with so as to address this (and the earlier post). Thank you for your time and much appreciated. ---
**Author:** ![jgm](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/jgm/32/1360_2.png) [@jgm](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/jgm)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 9:32pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/2 "2021-12-15T21:32:24Z")
Roger via CommonMark Discussion [noreply@talk.commonmark.org](mailto:noreply@talk.commonmark.org) writes: > As background: I’m dealing primarily with Chinese, Japanese and Arabic but with people on the team from each respective area, and they are fortunately fluent in my native language or English. > > So, in the case of zh-CHT in markdown (traditional Chinese), per what I understand in the Commonmark spec, the below will fail to output properly: > > ` **「在進，** 進MORE CHINESE CHARACTERS HERE 。」` > > I.e. Asterisks will render. > > In the case of: > > ` **「我『12個』。** 進MORE CHINESE CHARACTERS HERE」 ─` > > This renders, just fine. What are you using to render them? With cmark you don’t get strong emphasis in this case either. The issue is that the ` **` in `。** 進` is left-flanking, and so can’t close emphasis. (I do appreciate that there’s an issue here dealing with Chinese; the current rules make more sense for a language that uses spaces between words. But I don’t understand why you say your two cases are treated differently.) ---
**Author:** ![Roger](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/roger/32/2381_2.png) [@Roger](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/Roger)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2021, 4:26am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/3 "2021-12-17T04:26:22Z")
Hello, thank you for taking the time jgm, and this possibly is not an adequate answer, however, I am using Goldmark - which per data to hand - reflects the commonmark spec. When you say “With cmark you don’t get strong emphasis in _this_ case either”; do you mean the second case which I state “renders, just fine”? And with that, pardon, I now understand your point. Both cases shouldn’t work due to the left flanking. Now, got it. So, in my particular case they are being treated differently by Goldmark, which I can track down exactly why, but that would be an issue for Goldmark, no? So I’ll leave that specific conundrum to that realm… Then I believe, the clarification to my post on Commonmark, please correct me if I’m wrong, would be: > Is their a plan to address the lack of an emphasis solution for Chinese in Commonmark’s spec due to the left-flanking of the subsequent character issue? Then, following this: > If so or not, is their anything I can be of assistance on to help move this forward or, approach a resolution? No? ---
**Author:** ![vas](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/vas/32/1267_2.png) [@vas](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/vas)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2021, 6:00am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/4 "2021-12-17T06:00:59Z")
> [@Roger](#): > > Is their a plan to address the lack of an emphasis solution for Chinese in Commonmark’s spec due to the left-flanking of the subsequent character issue? What should that solution be? Whether or not CommonMark will add support for it, I would like to know what a natural and intuitive syntax for bold and emphasis in CJK lightweight markup would look like. ---
**Author:** ![Roger](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/roger/32/2381_2.png) [@Roger](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/Roger)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2021, 5:58pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/5 "2021-12-17T17:58:13Z")
Thank you vas, that’s the description of the problem then, no? Give me about 10 days, I’ll be working with teams 2 of the three languages locally (not one of those areas) and abroad (in two of those areas), and I’ll get my understanding in of what’s available/practical and sequitor on their keyboard and text layout systems and give what information I get/best guess along with as much information as possible. Possibly I might hit something or at least give valid data. I’ll let you know. ---
**Author:** ![vas](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/vas/32/1267_2.png) [@vas](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/vas)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2021, 12:18am UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/6 "2021-12-18T00:18:57Z")
Thanks Roger. Whether or not CommonMark makes any changes for CJK, I’m interested as I’m working on a proposal for a more generalized and customizable markup standard with is fully supports Markdown/CommonMark. ---
**Author:** ![tats-u](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/tats-u/32/3002_2.png) [@tats-u](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/tats-u)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2025, 12:22pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/cjk-and-bold-tags-possibly-complex-issue/4034/7 "2025-02-02T12:22:50Z")
If you use the remark/micromark or markdown-it ecosystem, you have a good news: I released plugins for remark / markdown-it: [GitHub - tats-u/markdown-cjk-friendly: Make CommonMark more friendly for Japanese/Chinese/Korean (CommonMark next specification draft)—plugins & patched packages](https://github.com/tats-u/markdown-cjk-friendly) Specifications draft is: [markdown-cjk-friendly/specification.md at main · tats-u/markdown-cjk-friendly · GitHub](https://github.com/tats-u/markdown-cjk-friendly/blob/main/specification.md) If you bump into any issues, could you post one to here, the issue of that repository, or CommonMark issue [Emphasis with CJK punctuation · Issue #650 · commonmark/commonmark-spec · GitHub](https://github.com/commonmark/commonmark-spec/issues/650)?