Kenneth Whistler scripsit:
> It is intentional -- not a mistake. Either a character itself
> or a radical can be the shortest description of itself. That
> lends substance to the preference to use the shortest description
> possible. If a character is encoded, there is normally no reason to use
> IDC's to write a longer IDS for it (except for limited didactic
> purposes).
Okay, so John Jenkins's statement that an IDS should not be used in place
of an encoded character applies only to IDSes with > 1 character.
Thanks for the prompt authoritative reply.
--
John Cowan cowan@ccil.org
I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:51 EDT