CantoDict calls 証 a "non-standard variant of 證".
This definition is supplied by me. Now that you mention it, I see that it is not quite appropriate as “variant” usu means “non-standard”. Perhaps “variant of 證" would suffice in line with practice of paper dictionaries.
I’ve double-checked with about 10 modern Taiwan and HK dictionaries (all published in this century) in HK Central Library and am satisfied that証 is being accepted by most of them as “variant of 證". The Education Bureau site and 中文新多用字典 (2012) are the two notable sources which do not accept 証 as a variant.
Indeed, 証 only appears in 14 compounds in the dictionary, whereas 證 has 80 …
As 証 is either accepted by most dictionaries as “variant of 證" or refused recognition by a few, I would suggest that all the 証 compounds in CantoDict be deleted (just like all the Taiwan dictionaries are doing). Users should be able to deduce from the two (證 and 証) character pages that all the 證 compounds could also be written as 証 compounds if they so wish.
This definition is supplied by me. Now that you mention it, I see that it is not quite appropriate as “variant” usu means “non-standard”. Perhaps “variant of 證" would suffice in line with practice of paper dictionaries.
I’ve double-checked with about 10 modern Taiwan and HK dictionaries (all published in this century) in HK Central Library and am satisfied that証 is being accepted by most of them as “variant of 證". The Education Bureau site and 中文新多用字典 (2012) are the two notable sources which do not accept 証 as a variant.
Indeed, 証 only appears in 14 compounds in the dictionary, whereas 證 has 80 …
As 証 is either accepted by most dictionaries as “variant of 證" or refused recognition by a few, I would suggest that all the 証 compounds in CantoDict be deleted (just like all the Taiwan dictionaries are doing). Users should be able to deduce from the two (證 and 証) character pages that all the 證 compounds could also be written as 証 compounds if they so wish.