U+4548 ? 為何大陸字體顯示為「艹爿枼」而港台日本字體顯示為「艹片枼」？

01-15

微軟雅黑
微軟正黑

花園明朝

謝 @張爾卿邀，這是 GB 18030 中一個已知的 bug。

大陸方面的 Type Foundry 在做大字符集的時候，都是按照 GB 18030（含 GB 18030-2000 及 GB 18030-2005）來造字的，並未參考字形正確的 GB 7589-1987 的手寫母稿。

希望這個問題引起大陸字型設計師的重視。

詳情請見 Unicode 專家小林剣的部落格：

Houston, we have a problem …… with U+4548

Recent work has led me to more closely explore U+4548 (???), which is in CJK Unified Ideographs Extension A. (What is shown in parentheses in the previous sentence is likely to be different than what is shown in the excerpt above.)
The image above is an excerpt from the latest Extension A Code Charts.
At first glance, everything seem normal. The differences between the G
(China) and T (Taiwan) glyphs are expected, and perhaps more
importantly, unifiable.
However…

…when I checked the prototypical glyphs for this character in both vintages of GB 18030—2000 and 2005—things became a bit squirrelly (the GB 18030-2000 prototypical glyph is shown on the left, and the GB 18030-2005 one is shown on the right):

Of course, the difference is in the lower-left component, which is
Radical #90 (爿) in the GB 18030 prototypical glyph, but Radical #91 (片)
in the Extension A Code Charts. For those who are curious, the legacy GB
18030 code point for this character is 0x8233AF32.
Digging deeper, I found that earlier versions of the Extension A Code
Charts show a G glyph that matches what is shown in GB 18030:

Digging even deeper, we can go back to the original G source, which
is GB 7589-87, specifically the character at Row-Cell 75-15. Below is an
excerpted GB 7589-87 Row 75 that shows the (hand-written!) glyph for
U+4548:
Below is a closer view of the glyph for Row-Cell 75-15:

Anyway, this exercise told me two things:

Radical #90 (爿) and Radical #91 (片) cannot be considered unifiable
components. There happens to be a simplified form of Radical #90 (丬),
but that is out of the scope of this particular issue.

Dollars to donuts (日本語: かなり確実), the prototypical glyph for U+4548 in GB 18030 is incorrect.

Back to the grind…

iOS 9 的蘋方顯示為從牒。