This page is a compilation of formal public feedback received so far. See Feedback for further information on this issue, how to discuss it, and how to provide feedback.
Date/Time: Mon Sep 14 17:18:49 PT 2026
ReportID: ID20260914171849
Name: Harriet Riddle
Report Type: PRI feedback
Opt Subject: PRI #559 [CJK]
The following `USourceData.txt` entries reference the Shuowen Jiezi using a different format to the format used by the Seal block's source references. For ease of cross-referencing to the Seal block, here's the correspondence (so far as I can ascertain), which could be added to `USourceData.txt` should that prove helpful: UTC-00086;DYC 627.111;K-09042 # DYC 627.111 is also listed by UTC-00149 (D-09020) UTC-00087;DYC 637.220;D-09119 UTC-00090;DYC 270.341;D-04261 UTC-00091;DYC 270.341;K-04280 # DYC 270.341 is also listed by UTC-00090 (D-04261) UTC-00092;DYC 458.310;D-06679 UTC-00093;DYC 120.315;D-02167 UTC-00094;DYC 136.420;D-02435 UTC-00095;DYC 137.211;D-02441 UTC-00120;DYC 021.310;D-02105 # See remarks below. UTC-00121;DYC 041.311;D-00608 UTC-00122;DYC 058.330;D-00933 UTC-00123;DYC 103.410;D-01872 UTC-00124;DYC 137.221;D-02443 UTC-00125;DYC 138.130;D-02454 UTC-00126;DYC 163.430;D-02819 UTC-00128;DYC 183.220;D-03100 UTC-00129;DYC 183.220;K-03122 # DYC 183.220 is also listed by UTC-00128 (D-03100) UTC-00130;DYC 200.411;D-03341 UTC-00131;DYC 242.130;D-03866 UTC-00132;DYC 251.140;D-04008 UTC-00133;DYC 267.410;D-04217 UTC-00134;DYC 274.110;D-04300 # DYC 274.110 also listed by UTC-00135, which isn't the D-04300 glyph UTC-00136;DYC 275.410;D-04323 UTC-00137;DYC 342.112;D-05101 UTC-00138;DYC 350.310;D-05233 UTC-00139;DYC 351.231;D-05251 UTC-00140;DYC 354.410;D-05305 UTC-00141;DYC 440.410;D-06435 UTC-00142;DYC 456.212;D-06644 UTC-00143;DYC 484.412;D-07063 UTC-00144;DYC 496.210;D-07229 UTC-00145;DYC 515.111;D-07570 UTC-00146;DYC 551.210;D-07827 UTC-00147;DYC 575.112;D-08023 UTC-00148;DYC 627.110;D-09019 UTC-00149;DYC 627.111;D-09020 UTC-00150;DYC 642.210;D-09193 UTC-00151;DYC 643.321;D-09207 UTC-00152;DYC 646.121;D-09246 UTC-00153;DYC 656.121;D-09380 UTC-00154;DYC 675.410;D-09693 UTC-00155;DYC 675.411;D-09694 UTC-00156;DYC 678.150;D-09724 UTC-00157;DYC 680.121;D-09751 UTC-00158;DYC 694.212;D-09925 UTC-00159;DYC 722.320;D-10315 UTC-00160;DYC 739.210;D-10532 UTC-00282;DYC 308.441;D-04706 UTC-00286;DYC 341.410;D-05094 UTC-00287;DYC 510.441;D-07469 UTC-00316;DYC 074.130;D-01258 UTC-00319;DYC 070.231;D-01166 UTC-00320;DYC 054.221;D-00834 UTC-00321;DYC 047.411;D-00740 UTC-00322;DYC 051.240;D-00790 # Not D-00790 ref. glyph, but is to K-00800 as D-06524 is to K-06548 UTC-00323;DYC 660.331;D-09459 UTC-00324;DYC 665.230;D-09532 UTC-00325;DYC 678.410;D-09732 Since UTC-00120 is U+4DB9, it corresponds to D-02105, but the page number of the reference `DYC 021.310` appears anomalous in that case. My understanding of what is happening there is that the Seal block includes each distinct glyph form exactly once and that, if it was listed by the Shuowen Jiezi both as an independent character and elsewhere as a variant form of another character, its listing as an independent character was preferred. Thus, a listing of the D-02105 glyph as a variant after D-00256 would have been skipped over in the Seal block's numbering. I have been unable to ascertain how UTC-00089 and UTC-00127 relate to the Seal block's source references.