Corrections of Han Radical Folding

From: Christoph Burgmer (
Date: Tue Aug 12 2008 - 11:33:52 CDT

  • Next message: Arne Goetje: "Re: open source CJK ext A, B fonts"

    Going through UTR #30 [1] and more specifically the Han Radical Folding [2] I
    came upon two mappings that I would map differently. Furthermore looking at
    the file raised some questions.

    In [2] the radical supplement ⻧ (2EE7, CJK RADICAL C-SIMPLIFIED SALT) is
    mapped to Han character 鹵 (9E75) of which 卤 (5364) is the simplified Chinese
    variant. As a Kangxi radical exists with ⿄ (2FC4, KANGXI RADICAL SALT) which
    is already mapped to 鹵 (9E75) I believe mapping the simplified radical to the
    simplified character would be more appropriate.

    Similar with radical supplement ⻯ (2EEF, CJK RADICAL J-SIMPLIFIED DRAGON)
    which is currently mapped to 龍 (9F8D) though a simplfied character 竜 (7ADC)

    I am not completly confident about understanding UTR #30, but as there are
    mappings of radical supplements to simplified characters (⿈, 2FC8 to 黃, 9EC3
    and ⻩, 2EE9 to 黄, 9EC4) I believe those two were just not consequently

    Considering traditional forms versus simplified forms I ask myself if anything
    would speak against a locale dependant mapping. There is one Kangxi radical ⼾
    (2F3E) which is mapped to 戶 (6236) which itself has a simplified form 户
    (6237). In a simplified locale I believe it would be desirable to map to the
    simplified form. Are there arguments against that?

    A second question: [2] states that the radical supplement ⺀ (2E80, CJK RADICAL
    REPEAT) is the only radical not mapped to an unified ideograph. It seems that
    this radical is a variant of the Kangxi Radical 15 ⼎ (2F0E, KANGXI RADICAL
    ICE) as the Unihan database lists characters 冬 (51AC) and 冭 (51AD) under this
    radical. Using local fonts the lower parts resemble ⺀. If this radical
    supplement is a variant of ⼎, then a mapping could be made to 冫 (51AB),
    similar to ⺌ (2E8C) and ⺍ (2E8E) which are mapped to the Kangxi radicals
    equivalent unified ideograph 小 (5C0F). Am I missing something?

    By the way, the provisional report [1] states the range wrongly. Currently it
    consists of ranges 2E80 - 2EF3 and 2F00 - 2FD5.

    Is this mailing list the right place to ask?

    Christoph Burgmer


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 12 2008 - 11:25:33 CDT