Talk:Transcribing Chinese

I think for older English books we deal with, it is better to go with Wade-Giles. As you note, this gives better pronunciation for English speakers, and is in general more recognizable to many people with an interest in history.

I also suggest, when creating Unicode versions in HTML to use all the facilities we have. Show characters as they are in the source, and provide a tool-tip with the transliteration. A table could be added to list both Wade-Giles and Pinyin when that supplies in a need.

I had a books once giving transcriptions in (crippled) Wade-Giles, and added both the original characters and the Pinyin in a transcribers footnote.Jeroen Hellingman 02:04, 20 February 2007 (PST)