Duplicate glyphs not properly falling back: 擧(舉), 玆(茲), 尙(尚), 揜(掩), 絶(绝), 勅勑敇(敕), 敎(教), 拆(坼).

[Hong Minhee (洪 民憙)]

There are some code points which are properly falling back to glyphs of their interchangeable code points (kSemanticVariant).

擧(舉)
玆(茲)
尙(尚)
揜(掩)
絶(绝)
勅勑敇(敕)
敎(教)
拆(坼)

(Originally reported by 鎮黙 @nesroch at Twitter.)

[Lingdong Huang]

Hi, thanks a lot for the issue!

I just added some of the mappings in the new release: https://github.com/LingDong-/qiji-font/releases/tag/0.0.4

Here's what these characters look like now:

• 玆-茲 敎-教 mappings are added
• 擧-舉 尙-尚 揜-掩 勅勑敇-敕 I didn't add these. The missing characters fallback to the generated Source-Han-Serif-based fallback font. The ideas is that I'll add mappings, only when the existing QIJI glyph is of a less used variant, while the more commonly used, or "standard" variant is missing. This is because almost all characters have a couple variants so it's hard to keep track of (also there're sometimes nuances and two glyphs are not entirely interchangeable). However I do realize that what's "the more common glyph" differs between different regions/cultures, so please let me know if any of 擧尙揜勅勑敇 are preferred variants in e.g. Korea, in which case I'll be more than happy to add these mappings too!
• 拆-坼 I didn't add those because I believe the characters, though sometimes interchangeable, aren't exactly equivalent (at least in modern Chinese, compare source and source).
• 絶-绝: I added 絕-絶 mapping instead, since 绝 is simplified character, which already follows a fallback rule. Basically now 絶绝絕 all use the same glyph.

Thanks again for reporting this issue!

[T. M.]

【尙】 is the standard glyph for 【尚】 used primarily in Korea (although Japan sometimes uses this glyph to describe the sentence was written in Kyujitai [舊字體; Old style before 1947]), and 【擧】 is the same for 【舉】 in both Korea and Japan. and I cannot think of any other semantic and/or pragmatic differences between the pairs 【尙】-【尚】 and 【擧】-【舉】. Those are just the shape variations. I think it would be much appreciated if 【尙】 would fall back to 【尚】, and 【擧】 to 【舉】.