RE: Unicode 6.2 to Support the Turkish Lira Sign

From: Doug Ewell <>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 13:03:03 -0700

Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh at google dot com> wrote:

>> I was specifically, and only, referring to a character proposal—any
>> proposal—being dubbed "urgent" on the basis that a font hack has been
>> identified.
> Just look what happened when the Japanese did their own font/character
> set hack. The backslash/yen problem is still with us, to this day...

Again, I am not suggesting that such characters not be encoded, only
that the presence of font hacks not be used as a primary driver of
"urgency." Is is desirable to release a new minor version of Unicode
with ONE new character because someone distributes a hacked font?

I'm sure that if Michael were to develop and distribute a font that
replaced Latin-1 glyphs with Unifon glyphs, that would not
single-handedly drive the urgency of encoding Unifon.

Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | @DougEwell ­
Received on Tue May 29 2012 - 15:04:31 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue May 29 2012 - 15:04:31 CDT