From: Andrew C. West (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 06:40:20 CDT
On Tue, 25 May 2004 17:30:37 -0700, Rick McGowan wrote:
> > John that going beyond the double-twelve (for now) is just speculative
> > and not supported by actual use in dominoes books.
> I don't think this is speculative. A photograph of production domino sets
> above 12 is included in the proposal. We might as well add them now as
But we're not encoding dominos per se, but rather encoding representations of
domino pieces in textual contexts. Whilst pictures of domino sets are
interesting, and provide useful background information, I would imagine that
examples of the textual usage of domino glyphs is what is required in order for
domino characters to be accepted for encoding by the UTC and WG2.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 26 2004 - 06:41:52 CDT