Date | Description |
---|---|
IRG #59 2022-10-19 (Wed) 11:10 am +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | pending for ROK investgation. |
IRG #59 2022-10-19 (Wed) 11:10 am +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | pending for ROK and China investgation. |
IRG #59 2022-10-20 (Thu) 8:45 am +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | withdraw. |
Version | Description |
---|---|
4.0 | For 00785, change Status to Withdrawn |
4.0 | For 00785, add Discussion Record "Withdrawn, IRG 59." |
Source Reference | Glyph |
---|---|
UTC-03190 | 1.0 |
group | UTC |
a) Source Reference | UTC-03190 |
b) PUA Code Point | U+F475 |
c) Kangxi Radical Code | 32 |
d) Stroke Count | 2 |
e) First Stroke | 5 |
g) Total Strokes | 5 |
i) IDS | ⿱土𰆊 |
j) Similar Ideographs | U+58ED 壭 |
k) References for Evidence Images | GB/T 12052-1989 72-33 |
Review Comments
The Chinese version clearly shows 士 as the top component. Moreover, this block of the standard is arranged in Hangul alphabetic order and the character in question, read 산, is situated alpabhetically between 榌, read 비 and 厁 read 산. The reading 산 clearly reflects the Korean reading of the component 士, read 사, not the element 土 shown in UTC-03190. A character composed with 土 would presumably be in another location in the chart. We need to resolve the discrepancy between the 2 documents. My understanding is that this block of GB/T 12052-1989 supports Korean language bibliographic data used in the National Library of China. We should be able to confirm the shape based on that data. Or, perhaps Korea can provide independent evidence supporting that shape. Note that the document N4008 provided by Korea in support of this character merely cites the problematic version of GB/T 12052-1989 and does not supply independent evidence. It is possible that there is a ⿱土𰆊 used in Korean, but the current evidence alone is not acceptable.
http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4008.pdf
https://unicode.org/wg2/docs/n4104.pdf (see Resolution M58.03)
This means that the form in the original GB 12052 is regarded as the final authority.
2. Actually, the virtual row 93 of GB 12345 is not always correct either. 0x7D3A is missing 罒, but 72-20 (0x6834) the original GB 12052 is not. And GK-6834 (or G1-7D3A) is mapped to U+56D5 囕, with 罒.
- KR did not see any document containing UTC-03190 glyph.
- When a new evidence containing UTC-03190 glyph is provided in the future, KR will review the evidence and post KR opinion. Until then, KR suggests not to encode UTC-03190.