Re: Euro

From: John H. Jenkins (
Date: Mon Oct 20 1997 - 15:05:52 EDT

On 10/20/97 10:03 AM, Carrasco Benitez Manuel
( wrote:

>There is some kind of confussion. In the book "The Unicode
>Standard, Version 2.0" is the following:
>in the glyph CE the characters are interlaced and the E is lower.
>I do *not* want to add any character, just Unicode to indicate that
>the correct glyph is the "E" with the parallel middle "=" (have a look

The position of the Unicode Consortium is that U+20A0 is inappropriate to
use for the Euro (i.e., it has a different meaning). It isn't a glyph
issue; we consider them two different symbols.

>I first notice this in Sep96 in San Jose when the book was released and
>I commented on it.
>It is reasonable to assume that the position 20A0 is for the EURO and not
>for the ECU according the name given.

This is not, however, the position of the UTC. The UTC has taken the
position that U+20A0 is *not* for the Euro. A new position has been
proposed for the latter.

>Question: does position 20A0 for the ECU or EURO ?

Neither. It's for "an undefined, future pan-European currency." When
the Euro comes into existence, it won't be "undefined," and it won't be
"future," hence U+20A0 isn't appropriate to use for it.

Again, U+20A0 was added for compatibility with Xerox' existing character
set. Because it's unclear who (if anybody) is using the Xerox character
for and what they may mean by it, it was felt better to add a new
character whose meaning will be clearly defined to be the Euro and
nothing else.

>Because if the position 20A0 if for the ECU, this is really confusing.

Well, yes. :-)

The position of the UTC is that U+20AC will be for the Euro, when
officially added. See

John H. Jenkins

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:37 EDT