Yes, theoretically speaking this distinction might have been useful, but so would have been combining hieroglyphs and hangul jamo and the ability to define an e

Yes, theoretically speaking this distinction might have been useful, but so would have been combining hieroglyphs and hangul jamo and the ability to define an entirely new CJK character by specifying components and placements would have been even nicer. None of this would be solved by devolving back to popular pre-unicode standards like EUC-JP or Big5.