On Fri, 18 Jan 2002 DougEwell2@cs.com wrote:
> I think the Unicode Consortium and WG2 do understand this, and that is why
> they are so reluctant to encode symbols that do not have established usage,
> as in the case of 2 pi, or seek to make a social or political statement that
> the Consortium and WG2 do not intend, as in the case of copyleft.
This started to annoy me. If the symbols in Unicode make a political
statement by being there, then Unicode supports Christianity (U+2626 and
others), anti-Christianity (U+FB29), Islam (U+262a), Hippies (U+262e),
Communism (U+262d), and Dharma (U+2638). But somehow the symbol of a
minor American social movement is unacceptable because it makes a
social statement. If that were true (the actual reason it's not
encoded is because it's not used), then I would be highly offended.
-- David Starner - starner@okstate.edu, dvdeug/jabber.com (Jabber) Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org When the aliens come, when the deathrays hum, when the bombers bomb, we'll still be freakin' friends. - "Freakin' Friends"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 13:02:54 EST