Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HK & TW glyph issue for U+50F0 僰 and U+68D7 棗 #135

Closed
tamcy opened this issue Nov 20, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

HK & TW glyph issue for U+50F0 僰 and U+68D7 棗 #135

tamcy opened this issue Nov 20, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@tamcy
Copy link

tamcy commented Nov 20, 2021

Source Han Serif Version: v2.000

u50F0,u68D7

This one is easy to get overlooked. I just spot this by accident.

The CN glyphs for U+50F0 僰 and U+68D7 棗 cannot be used for HK or TW because of the difference in the 朿 component.
For U+68D7 棗, suggest to remap TW and HK to JP.
For U+50F0 僰, unfortunately (?) the JP glyph cannot be directly used because of the stroke form difference in the last stroke of 朿 on the right.
If allocating a new glyph isn't possible right now, I think the JP glyph is preferable for this case.

@tamcy tamcy changed the title HK/TW glyph issue for U+50F0 僰 and U+68D7 棗 HK & TW glyph issue for U+50F0 僰 and U+68D7 棗 Nov 20, 2021
@Marcus98T
Copy link

Marcus98T commented Dec 6, 2021

While this isn't related to the HK/TW mapping issue, I also want to point out the KR mapping for U+68D7 棗 should be the same as the JP version. Please fix this as well.

While some major Korean fonts like (from left to right) Adobe Gothic Std, Apple Myungjo Std, Apple SD Gothic Neo (based off Nanum Gothic) and Apple Gothic have the CN form, this I think is inconsistent. Apple Myungjo (far right) has the JP form.

Screenshot 2021-12-06 at 16 17 03

And yes, while the Korean Unicode reference is not consistent in some ways, I think 棗 needs to be more consistent with the other glyphs that have 朿 as the component.

Screenshot 2021-12-06 at 16 10 18

Screenshot 2021-12-06 at 16 10 54

Screenshot 2021-12-06 at 16 11 14

@tamcy
Copy link
Author

tamcy commented Jan 27, 2022

Fix to U+68D7 and U+50F0 confirmed in v2.001. Thanks!

@NightFurySL2001
Copy link

image
@punchcutter Inconsistent record in Readme file compared to here.

@punchcutter
Copy link
Member

Removed the mistaken line from the README.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants