From: Asmus Freytag (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Mar 27 2008 - 17:32:07 CST
That's a sensible suggestion, and valid in general. The status as 'official' is always subject to change, and for some currencies there may never have been official use of symbols, only customary usage. For the symbol under discussion it seems that Ruble might have to be part of the name somehow.Jim Melton wrote:Hmmmm...that raises an interesting question: Has it ever happened that a character has been encoded prior to knowing what the glyph will be?A good solution is to adopt a name for such non official glyph that will not prohibit the future adoption of a precise symbol with stronger semantics. But it should be noted that the name "Ruble" is not specific to Russia, and the same symbol currently used could still persist and be used for other currencies named Ruble. Each country (or central bank) will adopt its own policy regarding the name and representation of the currency, independantly. So if one of the commonly used symbols were encoded now, it should not contain anything that indicates that it is an official symbol. May be this will be the official symbol, may be not.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 27 2008 - 17:35:53 CST