Re: Punctuation character (inverted interrobang) proposed

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Mon Sep 05 2005 - 16:43:44 CDT

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: Punctuation character (inverted interrobang) proposed"

    At 14:18 -0700 2005-09-05, John Hudson wrote:

    >If one is going to encode anything as silly as
    >the interrobang, one should probably encode an
    >inverted version.

    I wholeheartedly agree!

    >But having encoded the daffy interrobang,
    >Unicode should certainly encode the inverted
    >version. Not for Asturian, but for American
    >advertisers targeting speakers of the de facto
    >second official language of the USA. If even one
    >of them sought to foist the world's only
    >non-grammatical punctuation mark on English
    >speakers, one can be sure that another will want
    >to inflict it on Latino consumers.

    The character should be added because it forms
    part of a systemic typographic practice. Although
    the character U+203D INTERROBANG itself is rarely
    used, addition of this missing character would
    regularize the use of this character in
    Ibero-Romance contexts: ¿Verdad? ¡Verdad!

    There's really no reason *not* to encode it. It's not as though it's harmful.

    Michael Everson *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 05 2005 - 16:51:13 CDT