I checked through the removed JP glyphs and a good amount of them are part of Adobe-Japan1-6. There were someissues reported before, and I’ve reported some of them as well, but I realized this is much worse than I thought. So I made a table below for Adobe to consider restoring the v1 JP glyphs, and a comparison gif file of the affected glyphs.
I will not be asking to restore all of them. There are a few of those in the table that might actually be renamed glyphs so they may look almost identical.
I understand some of them are removed either because the CN glyph is better designed or that it’s for balancing and consistency, but unfortunately, a good amount of glyphs now look a bit worse because they use CN by default, especially those with the 心 component.
Unicode
Character
Restore JP glyph?
Replace CN Glyph?
Notes
U+47E6
䟦
No
-
The JP glyph that is closest to Kozuka Mincho was somehow renamed to uni47E6-CN, whereas a separate CN glyph in v1 was removed. Suggest to rename it back to uni47E6-JP
U+4E0B
下
No
-
CN looks better
U+4F53
体
Yes
Yes
U+4F8D
侍
Yes
Yes
U+50FE
僾
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+5146
兆
Yes
Yes
U+5174
兴
Yes
Yes
U+5208
刈
No, but adjust
-
Adjust CN glyph instead to make the drop stroke in the left X component a bit lower. It has to be in between the v1 JP glyph and the CN glyph as a compromise
U+5261
剡
Yes
Yes
U+529F
功
Yes
Yes
U+5357
南
Yes
Yes
U+535C
卜
No, but adjust
-
Maybe move the CN glyph a bit to the left instead
U+53CC
双
Yes
Yes
U+53E3
口
No
-
CN looks better
U+540A
吊
No
-
CN looks better
U+548C
和
Yes
Yes
U+5515
唕
Yes
Yes
U+5549
啉
Yes
Yes
U+5556
啖
Yes
Yes
U+557E
啾
Yes
Yes
U+55C4
嗄
Yes
Yes
Supplemental to issue #158
U+55E3
嗣
Yes
Yes
In issues #130 and #156
U+5608
嘈
Yes
Yes
U+56A0
嚠
Yes
No
In issue #174
U+56A7
嚧
Yes
Yes
U+56DE
回
Yes
Yes
U+5728
在
Yes, and adjust
Yes
Maybe remove the extra detail from the left part as circled when restoring the JP glyph
U+5893
墓
Yes
Yes
U+58DA
壚
Yes
Yes
U+590F
夏
Yes
Yes
In issue #158
U+5961
奡
Yes
Yes
U+5C65
履
Yes
Yes
In issue #158
U+5DDB
巛
No
-
Looks the same, only uni5DDB-CN is kept in v2
U+5E1B
帛
No
-
CN looks better
U+5E55
幕
Yes
Yes
Supplemental to issue #158
U+5F53
当
Yes
Yes
U+5F85
待
No
-
CN looks better
U+5F92
徒
No
-
CN looks better
U+5F97
得
No
-
CN looks better
U+6041
恁
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6043
恃
Yes
Yes
U+6077
恷
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+607F
恿
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+60E0
惠
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+60E5
惥
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+60F3
想
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+60F9
惹
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6100
愀
Yes
Yes
U+6106
愆
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+610E
愎
Yes
Yes
In issue #158
U+611A
愚
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6121
愡
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6142
慂
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6155
慕
Yes
Yes
U+616C
慬
No
-
v1 was following extended Shinjitai, for which it should not be according to JIS standards
U+617D
慽
Yes
Yes
U+61A5
憥
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+61BC
憼
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+61CB
懋
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6234
戴
Yes
Yes
U+624C
扌
No
-
Looks almost the same (position slightly differed between v1 JP and v1 CN), but only uni624C-CN was kept
U+6311
挑
Yes
Yes
U+6349
捉
Yes
Yes
U+638C
掌
Yes
Yes
U+63F4
援
Yes
Yes
U+6491
撑
Yes
Yes
U+64CE
擎
Yes
Yes
U+65E6
旦
No
-
CN looks better
U+6627
昧
Yes
Yes
U+6696
暖
Yes
Yes
U+66AE
暮
Yes
Yes
U+66B4
暴
Yes
Yes
U+6728
木
No
-
CN looks better
U+6756
杖
Yes
Yes
U+6843
桃
Yes
Yes
U+6853
桓
Yes
Yes
U+6881
梁
No
-
CN looks better
U+68CF
棏
No, but adjust
-
CN looks better, but adjust the 木 radical to follow JP-designed ones
U+6A0C
樌
Yes
No
In issue #174
U+6A3A
樺
Yes
No
Regional difference in 華 component, bottommost stroke longer in CN than in JP
U+6A50
橐
Yes, and adjust
Yes
There should be no top decoration in the bottom 木 component when restoring the JP glyph
U+6ACC
櫌
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6AD6
櫖
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6AE8
櫨
Yes
Yes
U+6BAC
殬
Yes
No
Supplemental to issue #176
U+6BDB
毛
Yes
Yes
U+6BEF
毯
Yes
Yes
U+6C88
沈
Yes
Yes
In issues #148 and #156
U+6C9B
沛
No
-
~Regional difference: CN is 巿 (where the vertical stroke cuts straight through the other strokes as one stroke), JP is 市~ Late correction: Adobe should not restore this glyph, see this issue as the current glyph follows etymology.
U+6D7C
浼
Yes
Yes
U+6D8A
涊
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+6DC2
淂
Yes, and adjust
Yes
JP looks better, but there should be no top decoration in the bottom 寸 component when restoring the JP glyph
U+6E2B
渫
Yes
No
JP cannot accept CN-Song-style in 世 component
U+6E7F
湿
No
-
CN looks better
U+6FCA
濊
Yes
Yes
The 歲 component is already made consistent by using the KR glyph for JP, do not change. Details here. EDIT: Might need to post a separate issue about the 歲 component, but for now, the restoring of the v1 JP glyph only applies to CN/TW/HK.
U+7164
煤
Yes
Yes
U+7184
熄
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+72AD
犭
No
-
Better to keep the radical on the left side, also not much design difference between JP and CN anyway
U+7430
琰
No
-
v1 JP glyph nearly identical to CN glyph except as circled in the ExtraLight weight. Maybe keep CN.
U+74A6
璦
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+7684
的
No
-
CN looks better
U+76A7
皧
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+7708
眈
Yes
Yes
In issues #148 and #156
U+77A0
瞠
Yes
Yes
U+77B1
瞱
Yes
No
Regional difference in 華 component, bottommost stroke longer in CN than in JP
U+7935
礵
Yes
No
Regional difference in top 雨 component, CN does not have serifs in short horizontal strokes
U+79CB
秋
Yes
Yes
U+7A57
穗
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+7B14
笔
Yes
Yes
U+7B1B
笛
No
-
Looks the same, only uni7B1B-CN is kept in v2
U+7B45
筅
Yes
Yes
U+7B4F
筏
No
-
Looks the same, only uni7B4F-CN is kept in v2
U+7C34
簴
Yes
Yes
U+7C56
籖
No
-
~The 韭 part at the bottom left should connect like in v2 CN when restoring the JP glyph.~ EDIT: I checked that the glyph was likely adjusted for regional compatibility in v2. Do not restore for now.
U+7C89
粉
Yes
No
JP cannot accept CN-Song-style in 分 component
U+8004
耄
Yes
Yes
U+800C
而
Yes
Yes
In issues #130 and #156
U+8010
耐
Yes
Yes
In issues #130 and #156
U+8179
腹
Yes
Yes
Supplemental to issue #158
U+832C
茬
Yes, and adjust
Yes
Maybe remove the extra detail from the left part as circled when restoring the JP glyph
U+8478
葸
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+864D
虍
No
-
CN looks better
U+8700
蜀
Yes
Yes
U+8785
螅
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+8788
螈
Yes
Yes
U+87BD
螽
Yes
Yes
U+87CB
蟋
Yes
Yes
Unify the 心 component to JP
U+8986
覆
Yes
Yes
Supplemental to issue #158
U+8D70
走
Yes
Yes
U+8D85
超
Yes
Yes
U+8E59
蹙
Yes
Yes
U+90EF
郯
Yes
Yes
U+918B
醋
No
-
CN looks better
U+99A5
馥
Yes
Yes
Supplemental to issue #158
U+9A5D
驝
Yes
Yes
There should be no top decoration in the bottom 木 component when restoring the JP glyph
U+9EA6
麦
Yes
Yes
Supplemental to issue #158
U+9EE0
黠
Yes
Yes
UPDATE 2023-08-18: 岸 (U+5CB8) is resolved in Serif v2.002, so I will remove its entry from the table.
I checked through the removed JP glyphs and a good amount of them are part of Adobe-Japan1-6. There were some issues reported before, and I’ve reported some of them as well, but I realized this is much worse than I thought. So I made a table below for Adobe to consider restoring the v1 JP glyphs, and a comparison gif file of the affected glyphs.
I will not be asking to restore all of them. There are a few of those in the table that might actually be renamed glyphs so they may look almost identical.
I understand some of them are removed either because the CN glyph is better designed or that it’s for balancing and consistency, but unfortunately, a good amount of glyphs now look a bit worse because they use CN by default, especially those with the 心 component.
Late correction: Adobe should not restore this glyph, see this issue as the current glyph follows etymology.
EDIT: Might need to post a separate issue about the 歲 component, but for now, the restoring of the v1 JP glyph only applies to CN/TW/HK.
EDIT: I checked that the glyph was likely adjusted for regional compatibility in v2. Do not restore for now.
UPDATE 2023-08-18: 岸 (U+5CB8) is resolved in Serif v2.002, so I will remove its entry from the table.