Re: Unicode 6.2 to Support the Turkish Lira Sign

From: Michael Everson <>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 01:52:19 +0100

Get over it. Please just get over it. It doesn't matter. It's a blort.

There are many blorts. I've discovered some working with Unifon. I haven't exactly had much support from the UTC with what I've discovered. I've found the usual posturing about possible unifications with other scripts.

I went in saying, well, we could do this like Lisu, which none of you will like. And that was true eniough. So I did it the unification way as was agreeed one UTC, but then I get push-back about the encoding model and isn't the script dead and more of that.

None of that helps me to a practical way to use the UCS to publish Unifon texts, in paper form or in eBook form.

That's a whole hell of a lot more aggravating than a currency sign. At least to me.

On 28 May 2012, at 01:29, Doug Ewell wrote:

> Asmus Freytag wrote:
>> The typographers may not like that they won't be given the time to
>> allow them to organically grow a design, but fonts are appearing and
>> are using dubious encodings - thus the need for Unicode to act quickly
>> - and decisively.
> This is perhaps one of the more annoying aspects of the recent "urgently needed, drop everything" approach to encoding currency symbols.
> A nation decides to create a new currency symbol, OK, fine. It starts showing up in hand-lettered signs and ledgers, good enough. No crisis yet. But as soon as someone cranks out a Latin-1 font with the new glyph replacing a little-used, but real, character such as U+00A8 DIAERESIS, and a keyboard layout that makes it easy for a user to type the new font-hacked symbol, then it becomes "urgent" for Unicode to encode the symbol and stop the spread of code-point abuse. I believe the Turks learned well from the Indians on this one.
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
> | @DougEwell

Michael Everson *
Received on Sun May 27 2012 - 19:54:37 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun May 27 2012 - 19:54:38 CDT