From: Elliotte Harold (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Nov 23 2006 - 05:35:21 CST
Kenneth Whistler wrote:
> Any symbol that is created that way, with specific intent to
> control its meaning and usage, falls in the same grey area
> that trademarked logos do.
I'm not so sure. I suspect these are closer to the copyright symbol, ©.
That also has a very specific legal meaning. In fact, it has a much
stronger meaning embedded in international treaty and national law.
That's certainly encoded and deserves to be.
If you start using that symbol to mean something other than copyright,
the lawyers would have a field day. In fact I've seen a lot of misuse of
that symbol that does not meet the legal requirements in everything from
books to T-shirts to web pages. But I'm not sure that's Unicode's
concern. The symbol is used in plain text. Therefore we encode it.
The creative commons symbols are not as widely used yet, but if they are
or do become widely used, then I think they should be encoded on the
same grounds the copyright sign is encoded.
-- Elliotte Rusty Harold firstname.lastname@example.org Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 23 2006 - 05:36:57 CST