From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Tue Jun 24 2003 - 05:46:10 EDT
At 00:41 -0500 2003-06-24, Peter_Constable@sil.org wrote:
>Michael Everson wrote on 06/23/2003 07:54:13 AM:
>
>> We have *all* seen the atom sign, and I have,
>> as Liungman points out, seen it on maps, though I don't seem to have
>> such a map here in the house.
>
>But just because a symbol appears on maps, does that mean it should
>be encoded as a character? I've seen a lot of maps that have a
>pointed cross showing four cardinal points of the compass; should
>we encode that?
Sigh. Peter, it's just an example. It seems that there are a number
of symbols use on maps which may also have other uses. The crossed
swords which = battlefield in cartography and which = died in battle
in genealogy. Should a COMPASS ROSE be encoded also? It's a fair
question to ask.
It is not clear to me that every symbol we have already encoded will
be found in running text. Accordingly, some leeway needs to be given.
Many "named" symbols, to me, have their own lives and are stronger
candidates than things we already have encoded. What *is* the deal
with U+2621 CAUTION SIGN? I guess it's supposed to look like a bend
in the road or something, but I've surely never seen it. U+2668 HOT
SPRINGS is pleasant, but it's a lot less motivated -- to my mind --
than the DO NOT LITTER SIGN.
Symbols are complex. I'm not afraid of encoding some more of them,
and I've sucessfully helped to encoded a number of them over the past
couple of years. Neither do I want to encode everything in every
symbol font ever made, though.
> > Similarly, the fleur-de-lis is a well-known named symbol which can
> > be used to represent a number of things.
>
>In text? I've seen it on flags, on license plates, on heraldic
>crests, but can't recall seeing it in text.
I don't have access to a Scout manual here.... ;-)
> > I do the best I can. At the end of the day my document won its case
>> and the five characters were accepted.
>
>So, this isn't a new proposal? These characters have already been
>accepted? (If so, that's fine.)
It's a revision because there was a bug with some of the sample
illustrations. It also differs from its previous version in that it
gives new proposed code positions which reflect UTC input.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 24 2003 - 06:37:36 EDT