From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Sat May 05 2007 - 01:33:44 CST
At 18:23 -0400 2007-05-04, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote:
><devil's-advocate 1>
>So should we encode the symbol for Prince too? After all, we
>shouldn't deny Prince the character he needs to write his name
>either! :)
></devil's-advocate 1>
This is not analogous to LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SHARP S and you know it.
>I tend to agree with you here, Michael, but a question presents
>itself: are we really denying Peter the character he needs?
Not any longer. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SHARP S is now under ballot for
inclusion in the standard.
>Peter can consider WEISS an error if he likes, but that *is*
>normative orthography.
What the Innenministerium puts on his Ausweis is perhaps beyond his
control, but what he prefers to send and receive in e-mail is his
business.
>If I want Laibow-Koser to be uppercased as LAIBOW-K9SER, that
>doesn't mean we suddenly need a LATIN UPPERCASE O TYPE TWO that
>looks suspiciously like DIGIT NINE, does it?
I'm not impressed by the analogy. Sorry.
-- Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 05 2007 - 06:08:25 CST