New CJK characters

[john_h_jenkins]

> On Nov 3, 2021, at 4:35 PM, James Kass via Unicode <unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2021-11-03 10:18 PM, john_h_jenkins via Unicode wrote:
>> I should point out that even sophisticated systems that draw characters based on their IDS (or CDL) are not going to match the quality of a commercial CJK font.
> Any reasonable glyph is better than the "missing glyph”.

Oh, this is true, and I should have been clearer. IDSs as a way of *representing* unencoded characters is fine. It’s what they were invented for. And any rendering engine that can turn these into visually-pleasing glyphs is welcome to do so (see TUS pp. 750–751).

IDSs are not, however, a workable alternative to *encoding* Han ideographs as singletons. Even simpler ideas that would allow some ideographs to be implicitly encoded have been rejected by IRG members.