You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As a supplement to this two-year-old issue about some CN glyphs having only TW/HK forms, I found out that several GB18030 hanzi are showing only Japanese traditional print forms which are inappropriate for CN use. All of them listed had v1 CN glyphs, although some of them might not need to be restored if merging of components like 人 and 子 favours JP forms in the next release.
Yes, I raised the issue before briefly, and it's mentioned before that GB 18030 does not define glyph standards, but it will be jarring to see what Mainland Chinese users will find as inappropriate traditional print forms (alongside Taiwan Ministry of Education forms) for rare/occasional use Chinese characters, especially if they're on a device that has Source Han Sans/Noto Sans CJK as the only UI font and cannot install custom fonts to replace the default UI font (at least without a difficult and hacky workaround).
This is due to the 65,535 glyph limit and the practicality of having to restrict the scope of PRC glyph conventions to only basic Simplified/Traditional characters as defined in the G0-G8 GB standards according to Unicode, and the Table of General Standard Chinese Characters (通用规范汉字表, Tongyong), with extra CN-style characters for other rare/occasional use characters if there's space. But if we still cannot fit them all even after merging the non-essential regional components, might as well limit the PRC glyph scope to only G0-G8 (roughly), forget about GE and have thousands of unreleased JP glyphs to replace all CN glyphs that are not part of G0-G8, but obviously this means a lot more glyphs will no longer follow PRC glyph conventions and it might raise more complaints from mainland Chinese users, so it's not going to happen either.
Granted about 95% of them are GE sources (GB Extension, which means rare characters not reflecting real world usage), but a few of them are within the basic Chinese standards which means CN glyphs absolutely must be restored or new ones created, with the highest priority. This will be noted in the tables if I decide the v1 CN glyph must be restored.
The following tables are mostly correct as of version 2.004 and they are for reference only. I might have to do this again for the next version whenever it comes.
The tables contain all the removed CN glyphs as documented in this issue (may not be entirely accurate due to some glyph renaming, etc.), and are sorted according to Japanese JIS Levels 1-4, with the rest on another table. About half of them need not be restored because they are practically identical to the JP glyphs.
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+8217
舗
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+8304
茄
No
U+831C
茜
No
U+8358
荘
No
U+8461
葡
No
U+84B2
蒲
No
U+8511
蔑
No
U+853D
蔽
No
U+85AF
薯
No
U+86FE
蛾
No
U+898F
規
No
U+8CCA
賊
No
U+8CCE
賎
No
U+8CED
賭
No
U+8D77
起
G0, GB 2312
No
I would rather remove the feet from the JP glyph as per issue #293.
U+8ECD
軍
No
U+8F09
載
No
U+916A
酪
No
U+9192
醒
No
U+91A4
醤
No
U+92AD
銭
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+967A
険
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+9686
隆
No
U+96B7
隷
No
U+96EA
雪
No
U+96F7
雷
No
U+9759
静
No
U+976D
靭
No
U+981A
頚
GB Extension
Yes
U+99C1
駁
No
U+99C5
駅
No
U+99C6
駆
GB Extension
Yes
U+99C8
駈
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 𠂆 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+99D2
駒
No
U+9A12
騒
No
U+9A13
験
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+9A28
騨
No
U+9A5A
驚
No
U+9C52
鱒
No
U+9CF6
鳶
No
U+9D0E
鴎
GB Extension
Yes
U+9D60
鵠
No
U+9E78
鹸
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+9EDB
黛
No
JIS Level 2
Unicode
Character
GB Source
Restore v1 CN glyph?
Comments
U+4E17
丗
No
U+4E55
乕
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 𠂆 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+4E62
乢
GB Extension
Yes
U+4FFE
俾
No
U+5056
偖
No
U+50D6
僖
No
U+5116
儖
GB Extension
Yes
U+51A4
冤
No
U+51A9
冩
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 臼 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+51AA
冪
No
U+51B2
冲
No
U+51B5
况
No
U+51C5
凅
No
U+51E9
凩
GB Extension
Yes
U+5271
剱
GB Extension
Yes, and adjust if possible
In v1 CN, the right side follows 刃, not 刄. But because of a possible component merger for the 人 component in the left side, restore and adjust the left side to keep JP forms.
U+5292
劒
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+5306
匆
No
U+54AF
咯
No
U+54E2
哢
No
U+5540
啀
No
U+5556
啖
No
U+5632
嘲
No
U+56A0
嚠
GB Extension
Yes
Also in issue #374, under the section Missing Glyphs.
See issue #352. v1 CN glyph shows the two parts as connected. Would likely need a new CN glyph instead based off the JP variant glyph, uni73CEuE0101-JP. Do not modify the JP variant glyph directly as it is required for Adobe-Japan1 support.
Minor stroke difference is likely a regional difference. Maybe restore for consistency sake.
U+4E12
丒
GB Extension
Yes
U+4E2E
丮
No
U+4E40
乀
GB Extension
Yes
U+4E47
乇
No
U+4E51
乑
GB Extension
Probably no
This was addressed previously to make the right two strokes consistent between Sans and Serif, but I'm honestly not sure if it breaks PRC glyph conventions and whether they are related to similar characters like 豕. However, being a GB Extension character it might probably not matter. Even the commercial Chinese fonts show that the right part of 乑 is unrelated to that of 豕.
U+4E5A
乚
No
U+4ED0
仐
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+4FBE
侾
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+5010
倐
GB Extension
Yes
U+51A3
冣
GB Extension
Yes
U+51AD
冭
GB Extension
Yes
U+51BC
冼
No
U+5500
唀
GB Extension
Yes
U+5560
啠
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 𠂆 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+5564
啤
No
U+56AD
嚭
No
U+56CD
囍
No
U+57F8
埸
No
U+5906
夆
No
U+5B52
孒
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+5B6F
孯
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+5CC9
峉
No
U+5E6C
幬
No
U+5EFD
廽
GB Extension
Yes, and adjust if possible
The restored v1 CN glyph should follow the v2 design of 廴, and no feet on the top right part (also applies to JP glyph as well).
U+5F8F
徏
GB Extension
Yes
U+604C
恌
No
U+6197
憗
No
U+6215
戕
No
U+63F7
揷
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 臼 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+674C
杌
No
U+675D
杝
No
U+6844
桄
No
U+6857
桗
GB Extension
Yes
U+6896
梖
No
U+68BB
梻
GB Extension
Yes
U+68CF
棏
No
U+697F
楿
No
U+6A30
樰
GB Extension
Yes
U+6A91
檑
No
U+6BEE
毮
GB Extension
Yes
U+6C95
沕
No
U+6C97
沗
GB Extension
Probably no
Slightly different strokes at the bottom of the v1 CN glyph, probably not an issue.
U+6E57
湗
No
U+7047
灇
GB Extension
Yes
U+71AF
熯
No
U+722B
爫
No
U+7234
爴
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 𠂆 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+728E
犎
No
U+72B1
犱
GB Extension
Yes
U+7695
皕
No
U+76EC
盬
No
U+77A2
瞢
No
U+77EA
矪
GB Extension
Yes
U+7847
硇
No
U+78E0
磠
No
U+79C2
秂
GB Extension
No, create a new CN glyph instead
The v1 CN glyph is only slightly adjusted from JP, but the top part is a throw stroke but it's not supposed to be that due to the 避重捺 (no repeated throw strokes) policy for Chinese handwriting standards. Need a new CN glyph.
If merging of the 丷 (豆) component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+51F2
凲
GB Extension
Yes
U+5231
刱
No
U+5266
剦
GB Extension
Yes
U+52B0
劰
No
U+52B6
劶
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 𠂆 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+52B7
劷
GB Extension
Yes
U+52C4
勄
GB Extension
Yes
U+5303
匃
GB Extension
Yes
U+531B
匛
GB Extension
Yes
U+531E
匞
GB Extension
Yes
U+5328
匨
GB Extension
Yes
U+5329
匩
GB Extension
Yes
U+5365
卥
No
U+53E0
叠
No
U+53E6
另
No
U+543F
吿
GB Extension
Depends
JP looks better and the character does not look obvious when seen in small sizes, but Chinese standards dictate that the 牛 must touch the 口, so unsure for now.
U+5444
呄
GB Extension
Yes
U+54F6
哶
No
U+55E0
嗠
GB Extension
Yes
U+560A
嘊
No
U+5619
嘙
GB Extension
Yes
U+5620
嘠
No
U+5641
噁
No
U+56CF
囏
No
U+58E1
壡
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+58FF
壿
No
U+5936
夶
GB Extension
Yes
U+5995
妕
GB Extension
Yes
U+5A3F
娿
GB Extension
Yes
U+5A72
婲
GB Extension
Yes
U+5A8D
媍
GB Extension
Yes
U+5B5E
孞
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+5B7E
孾
GB Extension
Yes, and adjust if possible
The left 子 radical could be modified to the JP form if the JP forms are preferred for all regions.
U+5BF9
对
G0, GB 2312
No
JP looks better.
U+5C14
尔
G0, GB 2312
Yes
See issue #352. Likely the v1 CN glyph will be restored as part of a regional difference. There's nothing I can do to force JP to use CN forms.
U+5C2E
尮
GB Extension
Yes
U+5C36
尶
GB Extension
Yes
U+5CB2
岲
GB Extension
Yes
U+5D44
嵄
GB Extension
Yes
U+5D83
嶃
GB Extension
Yes
U+5DD9
巙
GB Extension
Yes
U+5E32
帲
GB Extension
Yes
U+5F2B
弫
GB Extension
Yes
U+5F2C
弬
GB Extension
Yes
U+6056
恖
No
U+60E5
惥
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 臼 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+6102
愂
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+61A0
憠
GB Extension
Yes
U+636D
捭
No
U+6371
捱
No
U+63C5
揅
No
U+645C
摜
No
U+64EA
擪
No
U+654E
敎
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+6598
斘
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 夕 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+65A3
斣
No
U+65FE
旾
GB Extension
Yes
U+661B
昛
GB Extension
Yes
U+66E3
曣
No
U+6707
朇
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+6710
朐
No
U+67A4
枤
No
U+67BE
枾
No
U+67FA
柺
No
U+682E
栮
No
U+6858
桘
No
U+6A37
樷
GB Extension
Yes
U+6B2B
欫
GB Extension
Yes
U+6B5A
歚
GB Extension
Yes
U+6B7D
歽
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 夕 and 斤 components favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+6BAC
殬
GB Extension
Depends
If 歹 favours JP forms, create a new CN glyph by adjusting from the JP glyph. Also, see issue #388.
U+6E42
湂
GB Extension
Yes
U+6E95
溕
GB Extension
Yes
U+6F04
漄
No
U+7013
瀓
GB Extension
Yes
U+7179
煹
GB Extension
Yes
U+7241
牁
No
U+724E
牎
No
U+7343
獃
No
U+7360
獠
No
U+7527
甧
GB Extension
Yes
U+7575
畵
GB Extension
Yes
U+7682
皂
No
U+76C1
盁
GB Extension
Yes
U+7773
睳
No
U+7796
瞖
GB Extension
Yes
U+784C
硌
No
U+7863
硣
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+7916
礖
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 臼 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+791F
礟
No
U+7B40
筀
No
U+7B53
筓
GB Extension
Yes
U+7B6A
筪
GB Extension
Yes
U+7BBA
箺
GB Extension
Yes
U+7BC8
篈
No
U+7BFE
篾
No
U+7CDA
糚
GB Extension
Yes
U+7CE9
糩
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 人 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+8009
耉
GB Extension
Yes
U+8013
耓
GB Extension
Yes
U+8040
聀
GB Extension
Yes
U+8060
聠
GB Extension
Yes
U+809E
肞
GLK 《龍龕手鑑》(續古逸叢書)
Adjust JP variant glyph instead
UPDATE 2023-07-30: The JP variant glyph, uni809EuE0101-JP, is much closer to the latest China GB standard, although the right 叉 component is an open loop which may not fully comply with the closed-loop form favoured by the PRC glyph conventions. However, I suggest instead to make an adjustment to the JP variant glyph to reduce the gap in the 叉 component so it will look a bit more compliant. Also see this comment.
U+80F7
胷
GB Extension
Yes
U+8141
腁
GB Extension
Yes
U+8152
腒
No
U+81CB
臋
GB Extension
Yes
U+830A
茊
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 𠂆 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+832E
茮
No
U+8550
蕐
GB Extension
Yes
U+8552
蕒
No
U+85B8
薸
No
U+8642
虂
No
U+865D
虝
GB Extension
Yes
U+8745
蝅
GB Extension
Yes
U+87CA
蟊
No
U+87F8
蟸
GB Extension
Yes
U+89A8
覨
GB Extension
Yes
U+8C63
豣
GB Extension
Yes
U+8CC9
賉
No
U+8CEF
賯
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 子 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+8D82
趂
GB Extension
Yes
See issue #352. Likely the v1 CN glyph will be restored as part of a regional difference. There's nothing I can do to force JP to use CN forms.
U+8D9E
趞
No
U+8DE5
跥
GB Extension
Yes
U+8EC7
軇
GB Extension
Yes
U+8F27
輧
No
U+90C9
郉
GB Extension
Yes
U+90CC
郌
No
U+913C
鄼
GB Extension
Yes
U+921D
鈝
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+921F
鈟
GB Extension
Maybe create a new CN glyph instead
It would be better to create a new CN glyph by basing it off the JP glyph if the 金 component can be merged to the JP forms.
U+9292
銒
GB Extension
Maybe create a new CN glyph instead
It would be better to create a new CN glyph by basing it off the JP glyph if the 金 component can be merged to the JP forms.
U+9337
錷
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+936F
鍯
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+937F
鍿
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+9402
鐂
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+941F
鐟
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+9459
鑙
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+945C
鑜
GB Extension
Depends
If merging of the 金 component favours JP forms, no need to restore.
U+9484
钄
GB Extension
Maybe create a new CN glyph instead
It would be better to create a new CN glyph by basing it off the JP glyph, because the 柬 part in the bottom right must be a drop stroke (點), not a throw stroke (捺), and that is if the 金 component can be merged to the JP forms.
UPDATE 2023-07-30: Added more info about 肞 (U+809E) which I didn't check properly, so Adobe should not restore the v1 CN glyph, and instead adjust the JP variant glyph, uni809EuE0101-JP, so that it matches the JP glyph of 叉 (U+53C9).
UPDATE 2023-08-03: Changed entry for 圸 (U+5738) to "restore v1 CN glyph" instead of "do not restore v1 CN glyph", missed that one out.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As a supplement to this two-year-old issue about some CN glyphs having only TW/HK forms, I found out that several GB18030 hanzi are showing only Japanese traditional print forms which are inappropriate for CN use. All of them listed had v1 CN glyphs, although some of them might not need to be restored if merging of components like 人 and 子 favours JP forms in the next release.
Yes, I raised the issue before briefly, and it's mentioned before that GB 18030 does not define glyph standards, but it will be jarring to see what Mainland Chinese users will find as inappropriate traditional print forms (alongside Taiwan Ministry of Education forms) for rare/occasional use Chinese characters, especially if they're on a device that has Source Han Sans/Noto Sans CJK as the only UI font and cannot install custom fonts to replace the default UI font (at least without a difficult and hacky workaround).
This is due to the 65,535 glyph limit and the practicality of having to restrict the scope of PRC glyph conventions to only basic Simplified/Traditional characters as defined in the G0-G8 GB standards according to Unicode, and the Table of General Standard Chinese Characters (通用规范汉字表, Tongyong), with extra CN-style characters for other rare/occasional use characters if there's space. But if we still cannot fit them all even after merging the non-essential regional components, might as well limit the PRC glyph scope to only G0-G8 (roughly), forget about GE and have thousands of unreleased JP glyphs to replace all CN glyphs that are not part of G0-G8, but obviously this means a lot more glyphs will no longer follow PRC glyph conventions and it might raise more complaints from mainland Chinese users, so it's not going to happen either.
Granted about 95% of them are GE sources (GB Extension, which means rare characters not reflecting real world usage), but a few of them are within the basic Chinese standards which means CN glyphs absolutely must be restored or new ones created, with the highest priority. This will be noted in the tables if I decide the v1 CN glyph must be restored.
The following tables are mostly correct as of version 2.004 and they are for reference only. I might have to do this again for the next version whenever it comes.
The tables contain all the removed CN glyphs as documented in this issue (may not be entirely accurate due to some glyph renaming, etc.), and are sorted according to Japanese JIS Levels 1-4, with the rest on another table. About half of them need not be restored because they are practically identical to the JP glyphs.
Also applies to Serif, which can be seen here.
JIS Level 1
JIS Level 2
JIS Level 3
JIS Level 4
Other Non-JIS Characters
Most of them are part of Adobe-Japan1-6
Also see this comment.
UPDATE 2023-07-23: The v1 CN glyphs for 妕 (U+5995), 娿 (U+5A3F), 婲 (U+5A72) and 媍 (U+5A8D) must be restored, instead of "should not be restored", because previously I failed to notice the regional difference in the 女 component. Ironically for Serif, the JP glyphs for 娿 (U+5A3F) and 婲 (U+5A72) were mistakenly removed which is required for Korean KSX support.
UPDATE 2023-07-30: Added more info about 肞 (U+809E) which I didn't check properly, so Adobe should not restore the v1 CN glyph, and instead adjust the JP variant glyph, uni809EuE0101-JP, so that it matches the JP glyph of 叉 (U+53C9).
UPDATE 2023-08-03: Changed entry for 圸 (U+5738) to "restore v1 CN glyph" instead of "do not restore v1 CN glyph", missed that one out.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: