Am 09.01.2008 um 03:51 schrieb Kenichi Handa:

>> Arial Unicode has U+1F48. It does not have it in a gb18030.2000-0
>> font encoding, because this code point is not defined in
>> GB18030-2000. So one of the first mistakes is to assume U+1F48 is
>> defined in GB18030-2000
>
> The charset GB18030-2000 surely contains U+1F48.  Actually
> it contains all Unicode characters.
>
>> and another one is to use a partial font
>> encoding like gb18030.2000-0
>
> What do you mean by "partial font encoding"?  Anyway, as I
> wrote before, the bug of selecting a font that doesn't have
> the character should be fixed now.

Can be I misunderstood the standard and saw gaps in it when there  
none. Anyway: fact is that a few programmes show that arial unicode  
ms has U+1F48 and GNU Emacs 23.0.60 does not display it from the  
font's gb18030.2000-0 encoding. I am attaching two screenshots from  
xfd. The gb18030.2000-0 encoding variant starts far behind Greek at U 
+8140, which I understand as: this encoding does not provide glyphs  
outside some Chinese block(s).