From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jul 14 2003 - 15:02:01 EDT
At 10:34 -0700 2003-07-14, Peter Kirk wrote:
>On 14/07/2003 09:04, Doug Ewell wrote:
>>* Michael Everson's and Roozbeh Pournader's provisional PUA assignments
>>for ARABIC PASHTO ZWARAKAY and AFGHANI SIGN, two legitimate characters
>>that cannot be represented in Unicode by any other means.
>Why not, may I ask, as a newcomer to this list? Is there some
>technical reason, or a political one?
What do you mean? The ZWARAKAY is a new combining mark; the AFGHANI
SIGN is a unique currency symbol. Neither is yet encoded. In the
report, Computer Locale Requirements for Afghanistan, it is
recommended to use a PUA character until such time as the encoding
process has run its course.
I would not recommend using COMBINING MACRON for the ZWARAKAY, and I
don't know what could be recommended for the AFGHANI SIGN that is
already encoded, apart from writing out the word.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 14 2003 - 15:53:50 EDT