| Date | Description |
|---|---|
| IRG #65 2025-10-14 (Tue) 12:22 pm +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | Not unified to 𮉆 U+2E246 |
| Version | Description |
|---|---|
| 4.0 | For 02999, add Discussion Record "Not unified to 𮉆 U+2E246, IRG 65." |
| 4.0 | For 02999, change IDS to ⿰糹𪺒 |
| 4.0 | For 02999, add Discussion Record "IDS=⿰糹𪺒, 2025-11." |
| Source Reference | Glyph |
|---|---|
| TB-7D3F |
| Character Reference | TB-7D3F |
| Codepoint | E257 |
| Radical | 120.0 |
| Stroke Count | 12 |
| First Stroke | 3 |
| Total Stroke | 18 |
| IDS | ⿰糹⿱𥄃攵 |
| Variants | N/A |
| Pronunciation | huǎn |
| Total No. of Evidences | 1 |
| Notes | N/A |
Review Comments
Possible unification to 𮉆 (U+2E246). Despite the representative glyph, the KR glyph looks like below in their database.
https://db.history.go.kr/unicode/getCodeDetailHtml.do?code=73537
We could not find the original material, so I'm not sure if this is caused by normalization, but there is possibility that the original shape is unifiable with the submitted character. Input from KR would be appreciated.
TB-7D3F and U+2E246 differ in right parts, and TB-7D3F is used in a company name.