From: David Starner (email@example.com)
Date: Sun May 24 2009 - 20:56:50 CDT
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Doug Ewell <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Considering how far this thread has drifted from its Subject line, at least
> I can rest assured it will not result in an ill-conceived proposal to add
> new characters to Unicode to help advocate the so-called "dozenal" numbering
I looked into new characters for dozenal a few years ago, and there
certainly are new glyphs that have been used for 10 and 11. My library
was insufficient, and my interest wasn't enough to chase down sources
via ILL or the like, but I think I could have made a solid claim that
there existed characters distinct from any currently encoded
characters for 10 and 11, provided that you accepted that these wildly
disparate glyphs could be unified. Without that, it was a mess of
usages combined to one press and one time period.
-- Kie ekzistas vivo, ekzistas espero.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun May 24 2009 - 21:00:15 CDT