From: D. Starner (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Feb 18 2004 - 19:37:23 EST
> >And the subscript / is over the edge, as far as I am concerned.
> U+208D and U+208E aren't.
Why not? That's like saying that U+2128 ANGSTROM SIGN is
justification for adding further canonically equivelent
characters. U+208D and U+208E were, as I understood it,
added soley because some terminal supported them as characters
and Unicode wanted to support that terminal.
-- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 18 2004 - 20:11:56 EST