We maintain that it should be kept separated from 萈.
- The right bottom part 厶 is so strikingly different from 丶 in 楷書 that suggests structural difference
- It is used in a cite from 蒼頡篇, which might be related to its original shape
- The glyph is very unique that we couldn't find similar ones even in 異體字字典. Given it consists of elemental components of 見 and 厶 while the glyph is rare, few would be expected to look up this glyph using 萈; unifying with 萈 rather impedes searchers' usability.
As far as we know, the SAT database contain no other 萈 occurrences and all 莧 seem to be the name of a vegetable (xiàn).
Wang Xieyang's argument on Oct 16 seems to be summarized in two points with regards to unification rules.
1. This character has developed distinct identity from 𥦗 in some regions (namely China).
2. This character has different underlying structure with 𥦗, signified by the orientation of two dots in the middle.
The criterion #1 is about subjective judgement, so we will defer it to experts from China, but it is perhaps only applicable to post-簡化字 usage, where 总 is formulated as a canonical shape.
As for #2, we have seen some analogous case in this WS:
Not unified to 𢿵 U+22FF5, different structures, IRG 60.
, where it can be justified if we can prove that this character is an outcome of separate development path from 𥦗. In favor of the assertion, as Kushim pointed (comment #14323), we also have in this WS
that looks like its traditional variant without the 穴 radical. On the other hand, we also notice that, in Japanese 新字体, "window" is 窓 while 總 becomes 総, which suggests that the difference might be irrelevant. Do we have an evidence that shows somebody clearly recognizes the character as composition of 宀 and 总?
IRG Working Set 2021v5.0
Source: WANG Yifan
Date: Generated on 2023-12-08
Unification
- The right bottom part 厶 is so strikingly different from 丶 in 楷書 that suggests structural difference
- It is used in a cite from 蒼頡篇, which might be related to its original shape
- The glyph is very unique that we couldn't find similar ones even in 異體字字典. Given it consists of elemental components of 見 and 厶 while the glyph is rare, few would be expected to look up this glyph using 萈; unifying with 萈 rather impedes searchers' usability.
As far as we know, the SAT database contain no other 萈 occurrences and all 莧 seem to be the name of a vegetable (xiàn).
U+2C229 𬈩
Maybe expand UCV #321 and unify with 𣋱 (U+232F1)?
Attributes
According to the new evidence:
Evidence
Editorial
Other
1. This character has developed distinct identity from 𥦗 in some regions (namely China).
2. This character has different underlying structure with 𥦗, signified by the orientation of two dots in the middle.
The criterion #1 is about subjective judgement, so we will defer it to experts from China, but it is perhaps only applicable to post-簡化字 usage, where 总 is formulated as a canonical shape.
As for #2, we have seen some analogous case in this WS: , where it can be justified if we can prove that this character is an outcome of separate development path from 𥦗. In favor of the assertion, as Kushim pointed (comment #14323), we also have in this WS that looks like its traditional variant without the 穴 radical. On the other hand, we also notice that, in Japanese 新字体, "window" is 窓 while 總 becomes 総, which suggests that the difference might be irrelevant. Do we have an evidence that shows somebody clearly recognizes the character as composition of 宀 and 总?
Data for Unihan