At 20:12 -0500 2002-01-22, Patrick Andries wrote:
>>I don't buy the semantic argument. If it were valid, we would require
>>the Roman numbers as separate characters, because their semantics is
>>different.
>>
>But isn't this the case : U+2160..U+2183 ?
Those nastinesses got in for compatibility with some Asian standards, methinks.
-- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jan 23 2002 - 06:38:37 EST