> On Tuesday, October 16, 2001, at 08:00 PM, James Kass wrote: > > > Are there any instructions for reporting errata such as the glyphs > > at U+29FD7 and U+29FCE being identical? > > [U+29FD7] and [U+29FCE] are not identical. They are (admittedly rather close) graphical variants. If you want to ID all graphical variants, you've got a long row to hoe.
For an example of even closer graphical variants (some might even say *exactly* identical forms), compare [U+20a37] and [U+200ae] ... which I mentioned to Mr. Jenkins a few weeks ago. As he pointed out, they both have T-source numbers, and were perhaps deunified because they're separate in CNS 11643 ... [U+20a37] and [U+200ae] along with [U+28443], [U+20a31] and [U+20a5f] are of course all variants of [U+8fb0]. -Richard
