Re: Proposal to encode dominoes and other game symbols

From: John Cowan (
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 07:05:00 CDT

  • Next message: Andrew C. West: "Re: Proposal to encode dominoes and other game symbols"

    Andrew C. West scripsit:

    > And perhaps Michael would be kind enough to prepare a proposal for
    > traffic signs if you asked nicely ;)

    Yes, but it will be only four lines long. :-)

    > H.7 Some criteria weaken the case for encoding

    A few of these criteria seem a bit flaky to me.

    > There is evidence that
    > -- the symbol is primarily used free-standing (traffic signs)
    > -- the notational system is not widely used on computers (dance notation,
    > traffic signs)

    So it looks like there are at least two reasons to shoot down traffic
    signs already. OTOH, lots of things are not widely used on computers
    precisely because they have no standard representation (minority scripts
    being the obvious case.)

    > -- the symbol is purely decorative

    This would seem to exclude dingbats altogether.

    > -- the identity of the symbol is usually ignored in processing


    > H.10 Perceived usefulness
    > The fact that a symbol merely seems to be useful or potentially
    > useful is precisely not a reason to code it. Demonstrated usage, or
    > demonstrated demand, on the other hand, does constitute a good reason
    > to encode the symbol.


    The Imperials are decadent, 300 pound   John Cowan <>
    free-range chickens (except they have
    teeth, arms instead of wings and
    dinosaurlike tails).                        --Elyse Grasso

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 02 2004 - 07:03:29 CDT