Richard Gillam wrote:
> Well, right now U+0192 has both semantics-- you're supposed to use it both for
> the florin symbol and f-hook. It looks like this might have been a false
> unification, but I suspect that that will rest on whether these characters
> always have identical appearances or whether their glyph shapes can be
There are other problems: if the unification is maintained, then U+0192
is both a letter and a symbol. This causes problems for people who want
to make a distinction.
> If this is true, there may be some justification in adding a code
> point to the Currency Symbols block that specifically means "florin sign."
> The stated meaning of U+0192 right now is definitely "f-hook," with "florin
> sign" as an alternate, so if they were disunified, U+0192 would continue to mean
Unfortunately, existing mappings to legacy character sets give the meaning
"florin sign". Undoing this will be more expensive than it's worth,
so disunifying means adding a new AFRICAN F or the like.
> F-hook should also be representable with U+0066 LATIN SMALL LETTER F followed by
> (I'm guessing here) U+0321 COMBINING PALATALIZED HOOK BELOW.
No, that's the wrong kind of HOOK BELOW.
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies! || John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT