Re: Square Brackets with Tick

From: Richard Wordingham <>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 22:47:06 +0100

On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:32:45 -0700
"Asmus Freytag (t)" <> wrote:

> On 8/22/2015 9:35 AM, Julian Bradfield wrote:

>> There is no inherent meaning to the
>> order of codepoints, it's just convenience.

> And for that reason, we have property files to explicitly give the
> properties rather than asking the user to "glean" them from code
> point order.

But codepoints are normally orderly until they enter the ISO approval
process. Thereafter, disorder creeps in, and becomes ever more likely
as blocks fill up. The concern here is that the opening-closing
pairing information, which used not to be a property, has been deduced
wrongly. The code chart is prima facie evidence that whoever drew the
order up conceived of U+298D and U+298E as a pair.

I've traced the character as far back as . Unfortunately, its meaning
therein is implicitly described as unknown! It looks as though someone
somewhere fashioned type for it - or perhaps another of the set of four
- but no-one remembers what it was used for!

Now, *if* no-one is using it, it doesn't really matter if the pair is

Received on Sat Aug 22 2015 - 16:49:59 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Aug 22 2015 - 16:50:00 CDT