From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Oct 28 2002 - 12:09:48 EST
Marco Cimarosti <marco dot cimarosti at essetre dot it> wrote:
>> There are also lots of characters that "mean" the same, but
>> always (in a Unicode font in default mode) should/must
>> look different. Like M and Roman Numeral One Thousand C D
>> (just to take an example closer to Italy... ;-).
> Well, the first and only time I have seen that "Thousand C D" was on
> the Unicode charts... However, if I'd be asked which glyph is more
> appropriate for that character, I would say: the same as capital "M".
I would disagree with this. It seems to me the whole reason for both
U+216F ROMAN NUMERAL ONE THOUSAND and U+2180 ROMAN NUMERAL ONE THOUSAND
C D to exist is that they should have different glyphs. This is not
necessarily is keeping with the purest spirit of Unicode (which might
regard these as two glyphs of a single character), but in reality they
are encoded as two characters.
Note, however, that there is nothing wrong with using the same glyph for
U+004D and U+216F, although in many fonts they are different for no
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 28 2002 - 13:49:19 EST