| Date | Description |
|---|---|
| IRG #65 2025-10-14 (Tue) 2:33 pm +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | not unified to 𬜻 (U+2C73B). |
| IRG #64 2025-03-19 (Wed) 10:21 am +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | ts 11 |
| Version | Description |
|---|---|
| 3.0 | For 03266, add Discussion Record "TS=11, IRG 64." |
| 3.0 | For 03266, change Total Stroke Count to 11 |
| 4.0 | For 03266, add Discussion Record "Not unified to 𬜻 U+2C73B, IRG 65." |
| Source Reference | Glyph |
|---|---|
| UTC-03353 |
| Character Reference | UTC-03353 |
| Codepoint | F518 |
| Radical | 140 |
| Stroke Count | 7 |
| First Stroke | 3 |
| Total Stroke | 10 |
| IDS | ⿳艹从干 |
| Variants | U+83EF |
| Pronunciation | ケ (J) |
| Total No. of Evidences | 1 |
| Notes | N/A |
Review Comments
Suggest unification with 𬜻.
There is only one stroke difference between ⿳艹从干 and 𬜻 + VS17:
We can add a new IVD for 𬜻.
Given the usage 法華 in the evidence, I would suggest going ahead with the unification with
despite being part of the place name.
Given that there is other evidence of use, I suggest that this character doesn't need to be withdrawn. However, unification should still be on the table as I believe they (UTC-03353, U+83EF and U+2C73B) are variants.
▲ 塚田雅樹: 登記・供託オンライン申請システムに現れる地名を表すUnicode未符号化文字, 日本漢字學會報 第4号, p. 123