ATTN

⿱𣪊X miswritten as ⿱殸X is quite common in historical documents, while 𣪊 and 殸 have different etymologies. I suggest adding a new Level 2 UCV ⿱𣪊X & ⿱殸X, where ⿱𣪊X also unifiable with ⿹
𣪊X.

If the UCV is added, this character should be unified to 㺉 (U+3E89).

Consider Unification to 𪊨 (U+2A2A8) and add new UCV rule of 𣅀 and 旨.

As the Extension G snippets are not yet available, please see following snippet for U+3165C:

Add new Level 1 UCV rule 𧵩 = ⿱𠆴貝

Unify to 逆 (U+9006), cf. UCV #447:

Unify to 泟 U+6CDF with new UCV

Add new UCV
正 𠤭.

From the MOE Dictionary:

Oppose Unification to 峕 U+5CD5, even though it matches a UCV rule.

峕 U+5CD5 is a miswritten form of 旹 U+65F9. Unless TC-3A56 is a variant form deriving from U+5CD5, it is better to keep them separated.

This character, if encoded, would likely be unifiable with ⿰氵盁, which is currently coded in CNS11643 as TC-7234. Would TCA prefer to code (TC-7234 instead, then unify TC-4B4B to TC-7234?

Alternatively, both characters could be unified to 溋 U+6E8B, with addition of new UCV rule 盈 / 盁 / ⿱𠘧皿.

Data page for TC-7234 (Character Source: 財政部財稅用字):


Data page for TC-4B4B (Character Source: 內政部戶政用字):

The given pronunciation suggests it to be a variant of 嗌. Consider if unification to 嗌 U+55CC is appropriate.

Consider unification to 𥿯 (U+25FEF) because of the pronunciation.

Consider unification to 羗 (U+7F97) which has the same pronunciation.

Consider unification to 虔 (U+8654). The provided pronunciation qián concurs.

Unify to 淄 U+6DC4?

Based on the pronunciation provided, this character should be unified to 淄 U+6DC4. However the shape typically suggests it to be ⿰氵𡿺, which is not known to be an existing character.

TD-4B2A should not be unified to 庵 U+5EB5.

We should add new UCV 菴 and 𤲅, instead of unifying 奄 and 𤲅.

I don't think TD-4B2A can be safely unified to 霦 (U+9726), because the pronunciation given by TD-4B2A is lín, which suggests that the character is composed of phonetic 霖 with radical 彡, while 霦 (U+9726) is radical 雨 with 彬 phonetic, pronounced as bin1. If TCA can confirm the pronunciation, then we can unify or disunify with confidence.

Unify with 𭗙 (U+2D5D9).

𭗙 (U+2D5D9) is mapped to KC-05009, but the newest version of KC-05009 is ⿱山眉:


Suggest to update K glyph and also add new UCV 眉 ~ 睂.

Per Kangxi, the majority of characters with ⿹𣪊X structure by default have X used as the radical, so the second radical 79.0 (殳) is not necessary.

Keep primary radical 196.0 鳥, remove secondary radical 187.0 馬.

Keep primary radical R=196.0 (鳥), remove secondary radical R(2)=61.0 (心).

Keep primary radical 196.0 (鳥), remove secondary radical 112.0 (石).

There should be no second radical as per Kangxi the character 鸂 which is a type of waterfowl has radical 鳥.

Keep primary radical 196.0 鳥, remove secondary radical 167.0 金.

Keep primary radical 196.0 鳥, remove secondary radical 170.0 阜.

Keep R=142.0 (虫), remove second radical R(2)=40.0 (宀).

Per IRGN1183 Revised IDS decomposition principles, the IDS should be reverted to ⿲木犬木:

Keep primary radical 109.0 目 only, remove secondary radical 81.0 比.

The IDS should be reverted to ⿰法少 because the character is composed of 法 + 少.

Keep primary radical 130.0 肉 only, remove secondary radical 74.0 月.

Keep primary radical R=196.0 (鳥), remove second radical R(2)=30.0 (口).

Keep primary radical R=92.0 (牙), remove secondary radical R(2)=67.0 (文).

Keep primary radical 130.0 肉 only, remove secondary radical 74.0 月.

Keep primary radical 130.0 肉 only, remove secondary radical 74.0 月.

FS=2

Keep primary radical 86.0 (火), remove secondary radical R(2)=62.0 (戈).

FS=2 for 艹.

Keep primary radical 102.0 田, remove secondary radical 165.0 釆.

TS=11

According to IRGN954AR #13, the left part of 礼 is counted as 5 strokes:

SC=5, TS=12.
以 is counted as 5 strokes by Kangxi.

盗 and 盜 are unifiable, it may be better to count by 盜 per Kangxi for consistency. In that case, SC=11, TS=16.

盗 and 盜 are unifiable, it may be better to count by 盜 per Kangxi for consistency. In that case, SC=20, TS=25.

SC=13, TS=18.

According to IRGN954AR, the left hand side of 補 should be counted as 6 strokes, so SC=13, TS=18.

SC=12, TS=16.

I suggest China to withdraw the character.

As mentioned in the comments by Huang Junliang and Eiso, Evidence 1, 6 7 and 8 for this character appears to be for 顦 (U+9866). It should be removed.

Also, the source names for the remaining evidences should be given.

The comment from Huang Junliang suggests that this character should be withdrawn.

Corrupted form of 麑? Consider withdrawing or encoding via IVS.

The evidence submitted by Tao Yang suggests this is another form of 妓 U+5993, but the pronunciation from CNS11643 database is tán.

Is there more evidence for this character, including evidence of the pronunciation, which can substantiate that this character is non-cognate to 妓? It seems highly unlikely that 妓 would be used in a person's name.

There is another character ⿱艹瞧 (TE-4239) which is unifiable with this character. Would TCA consider encoding TE-4239 instead, and encoding TC-7C61 as an ideographic variant of TE-4239?

Data page for TE-4239:


Data page for TC-7C61:

IDS has yet to be updated to ⿰犭索.

The pronunciation yì would suggest it is unrelated to U+2E010 𮀐, but we are not sure how accurate the pronunciation is.

We should check if it is appropriate for 解 and 觧 to be UCV. There is a UCV rule #457, though marked as confirmed in IRGN2548, the quoted discussion records indicates it was only under consideration and has yet to be confirmed. 觧 can also be 鮮 in some other contexts.

kZhuang: reux

U+2C483 𬒃

U+2EA72 𮩲