Could please someone check the following article in a Japanese library?
週刊ポスト 3(21)(91) 1971.05
https://web.archive.org/web/20230119071958/http://webcatplus.nii.ac.jp/webcatplus/details/book/25053420.html
〓・〓・〓を読めない人は時代おくれ--【現代フィーリング研究】横文字はもう古い!ビジネスを発展させる漢字活用 / / 38~41
〓 Seems to be the unencoded characters.
If we accept kanji-kana hybrids for encoding then allow hiragana and katakana in IDS, but only when the component really is a kana letter (not just when a component looks like a kana letter, e.g. do not allow リ for lhs of 师). In that case, ⿸尸ソ would be a better IDS for this character.
I completely understand not accepting script-hybrid Han ideographs that include Latin or Hiragana components at this time, but there are already CJK Unified Ideographs that include Katakana components, and even one whose components are all Katakana. In such cases, and as in the proposed ideograph, the Katakana components are manifested as Han components. Katakana are derived from Han components.
Script-hybrid Katakana + Han:
U+2B9A4: Reading = カイチ (ka + ichi); Components = カ (K) + 一 (Han); See MJ057059
U+2B9AB: Reading = カタナ (ka + ta + na); Components = カ (K) + 田 (Han) + ナ (K); See MJ057066
#9327 shows that we are already living with script-hybrid characters without any problem. Since the nature and attributes of these characters are not fundamentally different from CJK Ideographs, I see no need to postpone.
Firstly, having already encoded similar characters does not necessarily mean that the same action can still be performed in the future.
Secondly, the encoded characters belong to the extended set E And F, The people involved in the coding work at that time may not have realized that these were script-hybrid characters.
Thirdly, the experts who raised the question had not yet participated in international encoding work at that time.
Fourthly, from the glyph of character form, the encoded characters cannot be distinguished from normal Hanzi through the proposed form, and it cannot be seen that their components are kana. The components fully conform to the writing and form of Hanzi components.
Fifthly and most importantly, after encoding such characters, their attribute annotation and component splitting methods will have an systematic impact on IRG PnP and Unihan database. The application of data carries too much risk.
I still recommend not placing such characters in CJK sets.
Review Comments
週刊ポスト 3(21)(91) 1971.05
https://web.archive.org/web/20230119071958/http://webcatplus.nii.ac.jp/webcatplus/details/book/25053420.html
〓・〓・〓を読めない人は時代おくれ--【現代フィーリング研究】横文字はもう古い!ビジネスを発展させる漢字活用 / / 38~41
〓 Seems to be the unencoded characters.
両親が70年代に作ったミニコミで大盛りあがり……
Script-hybrid Katakana + Han:
U+2B9A4: Reading = カイチ (ka + ichi); Components = カ (K) + 一 (Han); See MJ057059
U+2B9AB: Reading = カタナ (ka + ta + na); Components = カ (K) + 田 (Han) + ナ (K); See MJ057066
All Katakana:
U+2BCCD: Reading = ウツホ (u + tsu + ho); Components = ウ (K) + ツ (K) + ホ (K); See MJ057333
As an aside, the following ideograph in Extension F is a Hiragana ligature:
U+2CF00: Reading = して (shi + te); Components = し (H) + て (H); See MJ056854
Secondly, the encoded characters belong to the extended set E And F, The people involved in the coding work at that time may not have realized that these were script-hybrid characters.
Thirdly, the experts who raised the question had not yet participated in international encoding work at that time.
Fourthly, from the glyph of character form, the encoded characters cannot be distinguished from normal Hanzi through the proposed form, and it cannot be seen that their components are kana. The components fully conform to the writing and form of Hanzi components.
Fifthly and most importantly, after encoding such characters, their attribute annotation and component splitting methods will have an systematic impact on IRG PnP and Unihan database. The application of data carries too much risk.
I still recommend not placing such characters in CJK sets.