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
U+9FD6..9FE9 is not in any of the official documentation of all 5 regions supported by Source Han, and only GB18030 requires the presence of it (the glyph in GB18030 is not mandatory, only requiring the character codepoint to presence).
Thus, from the font's perspective, the character between U+9FD6..9FE9 should only have 1 CN glyph each to support GB18030.
However, there are some of the glyph that has a HK variant. My question is as follow
If HK is definitely chosen as the alternative region to be supported for this block, should characters that does not match HK be added new glyph and be fixed (above point)?
U+9FDB 鿛 should fix 夂 since HK 夂 does not protude outwards.
U+9FDE 鿞 should have a HK glyph added for closed 夕
U+9FE9 鿩 should have a HK glyph added for 曰 魯
If the HK glyphs are to stay, U+9FE2 鿢, U+9FE3 鿣, U+9FE4 鿤 and U+9FE6 鿦 (?) can have the HK glyph map to JP and KR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Since those characters from U+9FD6 to U+9FE9 only have UTC as a source, I suggest that only the CN glyphs be kept. The HK glyphs should be removed to free glyph space for something that matters more.
And finally, if the 人 component is to be merged to the JP forms, the CN glyphs for 鿖 (U+9FD6), 鿗 (U+9FD7), 鿘 (U+9FD8) and 鿢 (U+9FE2) will need to be adjusted, or if JP glyphs were already designed (does not apply to 鿢 (U+9FE2)), use them and remove the CN glyphs. As for 鿿 (U+9FFF), when it's finally added to the next release of Sans, should just have a JP-styled glyph.
Also there's no reason for 魯 (U+9B6F) to appear here, as this character is outside the issue scope, probably an error made while checking the glyphs for U+9FD6 to U+9FE9.EDIT: I didn't see that it was supposed to be a reference for a possible HK glyph for 鿩 (U+9FE9), but whatever the case, I think Adobe should not be making a HK glyph.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
U+9FD6..9FE9 is not in any of the official documentation of all 5 regions supported by Source Han, and only GB18030 requires the presence of it (the glyph in GB18030 is not mandatory, only requiring the character codepoint to presence).
Thus, from the font's perspective, the character between U+9FD6..9FE9 should only have 1 CN glyph each to support GB18030.
However, there are some of the glyph that has a HK variant. My question is as follow
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: