From: Leo Broukhis (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Nov 17 2009 - 01:32:15 CST
You may also want to contact IUPAC and ask if they would like to allow
U+207B SUPERSCRIPT MINUS as an acceptable alternative to a comma in
plain text Unicode representations of these chemical names.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Daniel Bonniot <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> The current unicode standards contains some superscript punctuation
> and mathematical symbols, in
> http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2070.pdf . However, it does not
> contain "SUPERSCRIPT COMMA". This would be useful for representing
> some technical text, for instance some chemical names. See this page:
> http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iupac/vonBaeyer/vb6.html the text starting
> with '220.127.116.11' below the first picture. For the '2,6' part, the numbers
> can be displayed as superscript numbers, but not the coma. As far as I
> know this would be the only character missing to properly represent
> all chemical names (which is part of my work).
> Did I miss a correct way to represent this text? Or is there a chance
> superscript comma could be added to a future version?
> Best regards,
> Daniel Bonniot
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 17 2009 - 01:35:17 CST