| 11. |
A 2022-07-08 17:04:31 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
On second thought, 剝 probably shouldn't be tagged as rK as it was added to the jōyō list in 2010 (instead of 剥). |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf> |
| 10. |
A 2022-07-08 16:34:17 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
Appears to be intransitive only. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -28,0 +30 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos> |
| 9. |
A 2022-07-08 07:51:03 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
I don't know either. Best left as it is. |
| 8. |
A* 2022-07-08 00:37:57 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
having transitivity tags on just one vs sense in the same entry looks weird to me, but I'm not sure what the 2nd sense should be |
| 7. |
A 2022-07-07 21:41:33 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
|
(show/hide 6 older log entries)
|
| 6. |
A* 2022-07-07 18:00:53 Stephen Kraus <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
[vt,vi]: shinmeikai, oukoku, meikyo 2e
[vi]: iwakoku
The kokugos don't appear to have our sense [2], so I'll omit the transitivity tags |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -18,0 +19,2 @@
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos> |
| 5. |
A 2020-02-13 00:44:56 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| 4. |
A* 2020-02-13 00:11:57 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
gg5, prog |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -19 +18,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -22,0 +22 @@
+<gloss>exfoliation</gloss>
@@ -27,2 +27,2 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
-<gloss>separation</gloss>
+<field>&physics;</field>
+<gloss>(flow) separation</gloss> |
| 3. |
A 2016-03-20 00:01:31 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
Adding 剝 to entries with is harmless, but not a high priority. 剝 came into JIS in 2000, not 1983. If you look at http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=剝 you'll see its JSource is "J3A", i.e. JIS X 0213:2004 level-3 addendum from JIS X 0213:2000 level-3.
Recently the JSC decided that 剝 was the genuine glyph, but the code-point for 剥 is the one that's in all the text up to that point. I wish the JSC hadn't done all those glyph swaps as it's going to mean a lot of pain in text canonicalization in future years. |
| 2. |
A* 2016-03-19 17:59:19 Johan Råde <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
The official 常用漢字 document has 剝 in the main table.
The entry refers to a footnote, that says that 剥 is a permissible variant.
I agree we could add the 剝 form to all JMdict entries with 剥.
There are 75 of them, and it seems 10 already has the 剝 form,
so it should not really be that much work.
I don't think we need a script. |
| 1. |
A* 2016-03-19 16:13:58 Scott
|
| |
Refs: |
剥離 15438
はく離 1546
https://kotobank.jp/word/剥離・剝離-357716 |
| |
Comments: |
About 剝: After reading a bit on Chiebukuro, it seems that 剝 was only added to JIS in 1983. 剥 was only used as a 俗字. So the correct character is 剝. Could be useful to run a script and add 剝 automatically to all entries that contain 剥.
http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1115969616
http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1385130248 |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -5,0 +6,6 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>はく離</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>剝離</keb> |