TC-3452 |
Date | Description |
---|---|
IRG #59 2022-10-20 (Thu) 10:49 am +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | add first R=88.0 (父), SC=4, FS=1 |
Version | Description |
---|---|
4.0 | For 01770, add Discussion Record "Add R=88.0 (父), SC=4, FS=1, IRG 59." |
4.0 | For 01770, change Radical to 88.0 (父) |
4.0 | For 01770, change Stroke Count to 4 |
4.0 | For 01770, change First Stroke to 1 |
4.0 | For 01770, change Radical (Secondary) to 75.0 (木) |
4.0 | For 01770, change Stroke Count (Secondary) to 4 |
4.0 | For 01770, change First Stroke (Secondary) to 3 |
Source Reference | Glyph |
---|---|
TC-3452 | 1.0 |
group | TCA |
a) Source reference | TC-3452 |
b) PUA Code of TTF | E104 |
c) KangXi Radical Code | 75.0 |
e) Stroke Count | 4 |
f) First Stroke | 3 |
g) Total stroke count | 8 |
i) IDS | ⿱父木 |
j) Similar/ Variants | No |
k) Ref. to Evidence doc | IRGN2486_TCA_WS2021_evi_03 |
k1) Page No. | Page4, no.1016 |
l) Optional info | mù |
Review Comments
If the reading is mù provided by TCA, the better radical should be 父 not 木.
All ideographic evidence submitted by TCA is NOT TAKEN from the CNS 11643 standard, but is specially produced from the database of the Household Service Department. It is a proof of actual need/use. It is an official document with an official seal.
What Ken's understanding of TCA evidence is incorrect. Or are you talking about "actual use" in some other meaning that TCA does not understand?