At 1999-11-30 22:57, Edward Cherlin wrote:
>Yes, indeed, we had this discussion before.
Mark's actually replying to quite an old message of mine... but perhaps
you've had the discussion before that, too.
>The conclusion :-) :-) is
>that (The Artist Who Should Now Be Known as What's-'Is-Name[1])'s
>pronunciationless name glyph is an idiosyncratic, personal, novel,
>rarely exchanged, private-use logo and graphic, and as such is not
>eligible (on seven separate counts) for inclusion in Unicode.
Perhaps it could be faked with symbols and combining marks...
-- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA Almost empty page: <http://semantic.org/>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT