From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Feb 21 2005 - 09:39:51 CST
On 21/02/2005 15:21, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote:
>>I would think it debatable whether this is out of scope. A logo symbol
>>is out of scope, I realise, but when a logo consists of individual
>>Unicode characters, that may be a different matter.
>IBM's logo also consists entirely of individual Unicode characters.
Indeed. But it is also a portion of text, rich text in that the font,
colour, background etc are presumably specified, but still text. See
http://www.unicode.org/consortium/memblogo.html for a good selection of
corporate logos. Some of these logos, e.g. Apple's apple, are purely
pictorial or symbolic, but others including AEG's and IBM's consist of
text, sometimes also with symbolic or pictorial background or stylised
letters. There are I suppose borderline cases: are the upper parts of
Adobe's and AOL's logos stylised A's or just symbols? The Everson
Typography logo is another interesting case: a double E and a V-R
ligature? Now I'm sure Unicode wouldn't want to encode any new
characters just because they are found in logos. But that doesn't mean a
need to deny that some logos do include characters.
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.2.0 - Release Date: 21/02/2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Feb 21 2005 - 09:40:21 CST