G. Adam Stanislav wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 04, 1999 at 12:57:58PM -0700, Jeroen Hellingman wrote:
>...
> > No, it is a glyph, and not a character entity in itself
>
> So, what are Zapf Dingbats doing in Unicode? And what makes a filled
> circle a character entity?
> ...
Exactly.
> Right now we have a mixed system: Unicode is open to accepting
> characters from anyone who can prove something is a character,
> but apparently accepts glyphs from those with enough clout, e.g.,
Apparently.
> Zapf Dingbats, or certain geometric shapes but not others. The
> situation is made more complicated with TrueType expecting a
> one-on-one mapping of glyphs to characters.
>
> Just my humble opinion.
>
With which I agree.
mg
> Adam
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:48 EDT