According to page 2 of WG2 N4008 (the first URL in my comment above) which in turn cites the source reference document for K2, 噕 is read 고 (go) or 하고 (hago).
But according to the evidence provided by Eiso, ⿱爲𰆊 is read 한 (han).
So it is not clear why the virtual row 93 of GB 12345 changed ⿱爲𰆊 to 噕.
1. GK-6841 (or G1-7D47) and GK-6863 (or G1-7D69) were removed from U+58ED 壭 from U+5655 噕 respectively because they don't match the ones in GB 12052.
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.
1. GK-6841 (or G1-7D47) and GK-6863 (or G1-7D69) were removed from U+58ED 壭 from U+5655 噕 respectively because they don't match the ones in GB 12052.
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.
1. GK-6841 (or G1-7D47) and GK-6863 (or G1-7D69) were removed from U+58ED 壭 from U+5655 噕 respectively because they don't match the ones in GB 12052.
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.
1. GK-6841 (or G1-7D47) and GK-6863 (or G1-7D69) were removed from U+58ED 壭 from U+5655 噕 respectively because they don't match the ones in GB 12052.
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.
And other characters with 了 at the bottom don't seem to be related to idu:
U+4EA8 亨 – well-known non-idu character
U+374B 㝋 – G (HZ), J
U+25923 𥤣 – G (KX), T
U+26957 𦥗 – T
U+26AFC 𦫼 – G (KX), T, V
U+29AF6 𩫶 – G (4K)
U+2A7FD 𪟽 – V
U+2CEFA 𬻺 – G (PGLG)
U+2CF49 𬽉 – J
U+30349 𰍉 – SAT
Comment
One more thing:
兯 (U+516F) is 丷 + component for syllable-final -ㄴ (-n).
And the 丷 here is actually an abbreviated form of 為 (爲).
So,
abbreviated form of 爲/為 + component for syllable-final -ㄴ = 兯 (uses 𰆊), but
unabbreviated 爲/為 + component for syllable-final -ㄴ = 爳 (uses 了)?
Comment
Dr. CHO Sungduk sent me an excerpt from Hanguk Hanjaeo Sajeon (한국한자어사전, 韓國漢字語辤典; can be translated as the Dictionary of Sino-Korean Words in Korea) published by Dankook University (단국대학교).
As you can see, the entry uses 𰆊 as the bottom component while citing the same examples from the same book.
Comment
This is my comment on Korea's document above.
Although Korea has been normalizing shapes (i.e. not always closely following the shapes in original historical documents), in this particular case it sounds like Korea prefers sticking closely to the original form.
Since both the 𰆊-like form (N12) and the 了-like form (N23) are from the same hanja 隱 and represent the same thing, I think both of them can simply be regarded as the same component and can be normalized simply to the 𰆊-like form found in other idu/gugyeol characters (and it looks like 한국한자어사전 already did this).
So in my opinion ⿱爲𰆊 should still be kept.
If Korea has an explanation as to why this particular case should not be normalized, or if I did not understand Korea's document correctly, please let me know.
IRG Working Set 2021v2.0
Source: Jaemin CHUNG
Date: Generated on 2025-11-15
Unification
According to page 2 of WG2 N4008 (the first URL in my comment above) which in turn cites the source reference document for K2, 噕 is read 고 (go) or 하고 (hago).
But according to the evidence provided by Eiso, ⿱爲𰆊 is read 한 (han).
So it is not clear why the virtual row 93 of GB 12345 changed ⿱爲𰆊 to 噕.
Evidence
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.
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.
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.
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.
Other
But here is my question:
If U+7233 爳 is read ᄒᆞᆫ (modern 한 (han)), why does it use 了 instead of 𰆊?
It seems that the syllable-final -ㄴ (-n) is usually represented by 𰆊, not 了.
For example, U+516F 兯, U+5381 厁, and U+58ED 壭 all have 𰆊 in them, not 了.
Also, note that these are characters proposed by Korea (they are all K single source):
U+2D177 𭅷 – ⿱老𰆊
U+2D178 𭅸 – ⿱早𰆊
U+2D17E 𭅾 – ⿱訥𰆊
U+2D17F 𭅿 – ⿱愁𰆊
U+3018C 𰆌 – ⿱日𰆊
U+3018F 𰆏 – ⿱自𰆊
U+30190 𰆐 – ⿱里𰆊
U+30191 𰆑 – ⿱者𰆊
U+30192 𰆒 – ⿱秋𰆊
And other characters with 了 at the bottom don't seem to be related to idu:
U+4EA8 亨 – well-known non-idu character
U+374B 㝋 – G (HZ), J
U+25923 𥤣 – G (KX), T
U+26957 𦥗 – T
U+26AFC 𦫼 – G (KX), T, V
U+29AF6 𩫶 – G (4K)
U+2A7FD 𪟽 – V
U+2CEFA 𬻺 – G (PGLG)
U+2CF49 𬽉 – J
U+30349 𰍉 – SAT
兯 (U+516F) is 丷 + component for syllable-final -ㄴ (-n).
And the 丷 here is actually an abbreviated form of 為 (爲).
So,
abbreviated form of 爲/為 + component for syllable-final -ㄴ = 兯 (uses 𰆊), but
unabbreviated 爲/為 + component for syllable-final -ㄴ = 爳 (uses 了)?
Dr. CHO Sungduk sent me an excerpt from Hanguk Hanjaeo Sajeon (한국한자어사전, 韓國漢字語辤典; can be translated as the Dictionary of Sino-Korean Words in Korea) published by Dankook University (단국대학교).
As you can see, the entry uses 𰆊 as the bottom component while citing the same examples from the same book.
Although Korea has been normalizing shapes (i.e. not always closely following the shapes in original historical documents), in this particular case it sounds like Korea prefers sticking closely to the original form.
Since both the 𰆊-like form (N12) and the 了-like form (N23) are from the same hanja 隱 and represent the same thing, I think both of them can simply be regarded as the same component and can be normalized simply to the 𰆊-like form found in other idu/gugyeol characters (and it looks like 한국한자어사전 already did this).
So in my opinion ⿱爲𰆊 should still be kept.
If Korea has an explanation as to why this particular case should not be normalized, or if I did not understand Korea's document correctly, please let me know.