Based on the additional evidence, I agree that the ideograph can be considered a variant of U+7E3F, but creating a UCV for 𭆤 and 參 seems like too much of a stretch. Also, the Moji Jōhō Kiban database confirms the variant relationship between 𭆤 and 參, and by extension to 参. Based on this, the ideograph should no longer be pending, and should not be unified with an existing ideograph.
Comment #14449 neglected to indicate that the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan's decision to substitute U+2B788 with 杻 (U+677B) is merely due to their own implementation limitations that favor characters in JIS X 0213 over characters outside of its scope. As a result, this comment should not be considered as a basis for unification.
Oppose Unification
To follow up on Comments #14449 and #14450, per this page that was published on 2026-07-02, the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan changed its policy, meaning that U+2B788 𫞈 should not be substituted with 杻 (U+677B).
Considering Japan’s successful rebuttal of the proposed unification of what became U+2B788 in Extension D and U+677B in document IRG N1495 whose excerpt is shown below, the UTC therefore argues that the unification with U+72C3 should be nullified, and that 丒 should be removed from the scope of UCV #103. Document IRG N1495 set a precedent that cannot easily ignored.
In addition, the disunification of U+247C1 and U+5CF1 as cited in Comment #154 seems to be out of scope.
Per email discussion, the G-source representative glyph is not to be updated (it currently follows China’s regional conventions), but those of U+3037C and U+3165C are to be updated from ⿺尼X to ⿰尼X at some point in the future to follow China’s regional conventions.
There appears to be an open question as to whether the upper component is 𡙁 or 爽. If it is the former, the IDS needs to be changed to ⿱𡙁田. If it is the latter, the glyph needs to be changed to ⿱爽田.
Is the top component 𠫓 (U+20AD3) or 云 (U+4E91)? The former, I think, from a semantic point of view. If so, shouldn't the top component be drawn like that of the J-source representative glyph of U+342C 㐬?
Per TCA conventions, the 11-stroke 黒 component might be the 12-stroke 黑 component. See 04128 and 04129 in this working set for how the UK applied normalization to their representative glyphs and use 黑, while all of the evidence showed 黒.
To follow up on Comment #1837, it would be helpful if ROK were to confirm the radical of U+2DA53, which is Radical 74. This affects whether this ideograph, which is assigned Radical 130, can be considered its simplified form.
Given that we are about to standardize the CJK Unified Ideographs Components-A and CJK Unified Ideographs Components-B blocks, this ideograph should be withdrawn then submitted as a candidate for the next block of CJK components.
IRG Working Set 2024v5.0
Source: Ken LUNDE
Date: Generated on 2026-07-17
Unification
Showing 3 comments.
Attributes
Showing 485 comments.
Evidence
Showing 8 comments.
In addition, the disunification of U+247C1 and U+5CF1 as cited in Comment #154 seems to be out of scope.
Glyph Design & Normalization
Showing 17 comments.
Also, the IDS should also be changed: ⿱𠫓小
Editorial
Showing 1 comments.
Other
Showing 2 comments.
Data for Unihan
Showing 7 comments.