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

uni6756-CN (杖) should use the shape of the uni6756-JP90-JP variant glyph #480

Open
Marcus98T opened this issue Jan 18, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Marcus98T
Copy link

Marcus98T commented Jan 18, 2024

Referencing #410 and #425, the JP-designed uni6756-JP90-JP variant glyph looks better, especially the left 木 radical design as annotated in this picture. I believe the unreleased uni6756-JP glyph is identical to said variant glyph. So I think the CN glyph should be replaced with the JP glyph, or at least use the shape of the JP variant glyph.

Screenshot 2024-01-19 at 00 04 09
@tamcy
Copy link

tamcy commented Jan 19, 2024

Just curious, as you mentioned you had already noticed that the glyph difference is actually pointing to a more generic issue in #410. Is it necessary to open separate issues for individual glyphs then?

@Marcus98T
Copy link
Author

Marcus98T commented Jan 19, 2024

Honestly, I think Adobe will only fix small issues (especially those that are technical issues or simple outline bugs) and link those fixes directly to the respective GitHub issues in their changelog when the next minor version is released. But bigger issues like the "generic" ones I referenced will take quite a lot of time to resolve, and it's not a priority for Adobe to fix them at the moment, so I do not know what's the best practice to report such larger-scope issues to Adobe at the moment, other than to open small issues separately when I find individual glyph problems and reference them to an existing larger issue as well.

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

2 participants