Date: Thu Jun 10 2004 - 15:21:42 CDT
Michael Everson scripsit:
> You don't KNOW that. You assert that. This is the "adversarial" style
> I was objecting to, John. Could you please take this on board?
Fair enough, Michael. But the burden of going forward with the evidence
is still yours. (I'll do what I can.)
> But it is QUITE another thing for you to come out
> and say that there are no other documents which make use of the same
Quite so, and I retract all remarks implying that.
> >In their day, there were probably a lot more documents using LATIN
> >CAPITAL LETTER ANTISIGMA and LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H LEFT HALF than
> >one, yet they are not encoded either.
> HETA is on my to-do list. Isn't ANTISIGMA the GREEK CAPITAL REVERSED
> LUNATE SIGMA that's under ballot?
Yes, except these letters are Latin letters (indeed, letters used to
write the Latin language). You if anyone should be against unifying them
with Greek letters, particularly since they were applied for purposes
very different from those of sigma or heta.
-- Newbies always ask: John Cowan "Elements or attributes? http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Which will serve me best?" http://www.reutershealth.com Those who know roar like lions; firstname.lastname@example.org Wise hackers smile like tigers. --a tonka, or extended haiku
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 10 2004 - 15:22:24 CDT