kvg:element="儿" kvg:original="八"

[Rúnar Berg Baugsson Sigríðarson]

I’ve noticed there are several places where the radical group has kvg:element="儿" kvg:original="八" but when I look up the kanji in KanDict I see that the radical is 10 (儿) and not 12 (八). Examples include 元 and 兆. Is this a mistake?

There is also a case of a few nelson radicals with kvg:element="士" kvg:original="土" but this seems accurate though, since a) it is not universal, and b) 士 is (annoyingly) a variant of 土 (no. 32) as well as a radical in an of it self (no. 33), but this is not the case for 儿 and 八 (at least not that I‘m aware of).

[Rúnar Berg Baugsson Sigríðarson]

I noticed quite a few entries have kvg:element="儿" kvg:original="八" and I was wondering if 儿 was ever a variation of 八?

The Nelson dictionary does not list 儿 (radical no. 10) as a variation of 八 (radical no. 12) and I’ve spotted at least two entries (元 and 兆) where kvg:element="儿" kvg:original="八" is listed as a radical and dictionaries (or at least KanDict2) lists it’s radical as no. 10. So I know there are at least a few mistakes here.

There is something similar going on with kvg:element="士" kvg:original="土" but I do think that is accurate though, because Nelson lists 士 (radical no. 32) as a variation of 土 (radical no. 33). And the couple of entries I checked had radical no. 32 in Nelson. This case is also a lot less common as the former.