For all TCA-submitted ideographs that include only this type of evidence, which is effectively an excerpt from the CNS 11643 standard, such evidence alone is insufficient. Their presence in the CNS 11643 standard can certainly serve as supplementary evidence, but it should not be the sole evidence. Other member bodies submit evidence that either shows the ideographs in actual use or in a published dictionary.

It is normal for name characters to be included in CNS 11643, but TCA does not submit CNS 11643 as the sole evidence.

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?

kMandarin dòu

Perhaps change Radical to 30.0 (口), SC=6, FS=1?

Perhaps change Radical to 30.0 (口), SC=6, FS=1 and move Radical 68.0 (斗) to the secondary one?

The pronunciation of the character seems to be incorrect. The character should be a variant of ⿱古斗, which is a variant of 𢪿(U+22ABF), i.e. 辜. So the pronunciation should be gū.

Agree to change Radical to 30.0 (口), SC=6, FS=1, and add the second radical as 68.0 (斗).

And the pronunciation dòu was provided by user. It is uncertain whether ⿰古斗 is a variant of ⿱古斗, so we could discuss whether to add the pronunciation gū.