From: Mark E. Shoulson (mark@kli.org)
Date: Tue May 08 2007 - 14:20:13 CDT
Adam Twardoch wrote:
> Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>> See previous reply. U+5350 isn't the Nazi swastika and doesn't look
>> like it.
> Are you suggesting that Unicode should encode a German "r", a French
> "r" and an English "r" because they typically don’t look alike?
Are you suggesting that a Unicode should not encode both Latin "a" and a
Greek "α"? (I'm not even going as far as Latin "A" vs Greek "Α" or "a"
and Cyrillic а). Of course I'm not, and you're not, respectively.
The fact is that German, French, and English all use the same alphabet,
and an "r" in one is an "r" in the other; they have similar histories,
usages, and meanings. The Nazi swastika and U+5350 have different
histories, different usages, different origins, and different meanings,
*as well as* different appearances. (yes, the histories are different,
even though both trace back to the primordial pagan swastika... They
developed and were traced through different cultures, their latter-day
history is also different etc). The Nazis *did* borrow a runic ᛋ,
consciously and in line with their origins and goals as they perceived
them. They *did not* borrow a Chinese hanzi graph.
~mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 08 2007 - 14:21:45 CDT