From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Thu May 18 2000 - 01:37:06 EDT

Asmus Freytag <> wrote:

> In the US, there are other symbols that would be needed, e.g. SM for
> 'service mark'. It seems that the user community is happy with using
> markup or rich text for the contexts where that is required - nobody
> has complained about an 'omission' in Unicode.

Nobody has complained because there is no omission. SM is encoded in
Unicode at U+2120.

BTW, an opportunity to correct my own error in this thread:

> U+2122 TRADE MARK SIGN is not encoded in ISO 8859-1, nor any other
> part of ISO 8859-1. It is widely encoded in vendor character sets,
> though. Windows character sets place it at 0x99.

That should have been "any other part of ISO 8859."

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT