From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu May 10 2007 - 03:07:02 CDT
At 20:24 -0700 2007-05-09, John Hudson wrote:
>>Similar characters are already encoded in the Coptic block.
>So I see, but since this set introduces a specifically Coptic
>chi-rho symbol as distinct from the Miscellaneous Symbol CHI RHO
>U+2627, I don't think there should be any problem encoding the
>staurogram as a symbol, especially as the typical evolved form is
>more pictographic than alphabetic.
I agree. I'd prefer the name be more atomic than STAUROGRAM though.
Cf. Coptic. But I haven't seen your examples. (You can show me
off-line if you wish.)
-- Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 10 2007 - 03:10:12 CDT