From: Jukka K. Korpela (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Apr 01 2005 - 03:19:03 CST
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Andrew C. West wrote:
> I also had always assumed that the second part of the Numero sign was a
> superscript "o",
The NUMERO SIGN is defined as having the compatibility decomposition
<compat> 004E 006F
so it is effectively a separately coded variant of the
two-character string "No". Superscripting is not implied, and in fact
many glyphs for the numero sign do not have the "o" as superscript,
though a little bit above the baseline (and underlined and in small
> which was why I was somewhat suprised to see that you use "N°"
> (N-degree) on <http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/iso15924-codes.html>.
> There doesn't seem to be anything in the Unicode Standard to indicate
> such a usage of the degree sign.
There is. In chapter 14 Symbols, section 14.2 Letterlike Symbols,
paragraph "Numero Sign", it says:
"Legacy data encoded in ISO/IEC 8859-1 (Latin-1) or other 8-bit character
sets may also have represented the numero sign by a sequence of "N"
followed by the degree sign (U+00B0 DEGREE SIGN). Implementations
interworking with legacy data should be aware of such alternative
representations for the numero sign when converting data."
-- Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 01 2005 - 03:20:10 CST