From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Sep 30 2002 - 11:22:35 EDT
Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin <antonio at tuvalkin dot web dot pt> wrote:
> I was quite surprised when I noted that a "combining large X overlay"
> was not included in the Combining Diacritical Marks block (which
> contains mostely non-diacriticals, rather iconic symbols, BTW).
> We have enclosing diamond and circlr and square, we have an enclosing
> slashed circle, and even an enclosing keycap... so why not an X
> overlay? Any idea why doesn't it exists, any current projects
> (missing also in the pipeline and roadmap, AFAICT), perhaps why is it
> a bad idea...?
Can you show why it would be a *good* idea? I can't think of any
plain-text uses for a combining X overlay, though I can think of
numerous purely iconic uses.
The burden is on the proposer to show why a proposed character is
necessary or would be useful. Saying "it seems like it should be there,
because many similar combining-overlay characters are there" doesn't
provide a persuasive case for X-overlay.
> Can anyone just step forward and propose U+20E4 for a "combining large
> X overlay" and call it a day?
Well, U+20E4 is already assigned to COMBINING ENCLOSING UPWARD POINTING
TRIANGLE. But besides that, you would need to fill out the proposal
form -- not simply mention it on the list -- and most importantly, you
would need to show what plain-text requirement would be fulfilled by
adding this character.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 12:08:05 EDT