RE: A .notdef glyph

From: Marco Cimarosti (
Date: Fri Nov 08 2002 - 06:40:22 EST

  • Next message: Andrew C. West: "CJK Missing/Illegible/Censored Ideograph Character (was Re: A .notdef glyph )"

    Michael Everson wrote:
    > John was pulling your leg. Sorry I responded to the matter.

    John Hudson wrote:
    > I was indeed pulling his leg, but I also knew that he would
    > actually go off and do it.

    William Overington wrote:
    > Well, you claim that now! At the time it appeared as a
    > genuine suggestion.
    > Reading the suggestion again now in the light of that claim
    > produces no indication that that was the case at the time.

    This kind of communication problems could be resolved scientifically by
    defining a Private Use Area character to signify "The following paragraph is


    Attached to the present electronic mail, which I am sending today to this
    public mailing list and to the three persons listed in the Cc box above, all
    interested persons will find a little work of art which I have produced, and
    which shows the glyph which should be used by the fount industry for the
    character which I have designed above.

    I must add that this glyph has an internationalisation problem. The same
    concept which the English express with the idiomatic phrase "to pull
    someone's leg", in other languages is expressed by different allegories.
    Italians, for instance, pull a different part of the body, which is located
    at the top of the back side of the legs.

    Marco Cimarosti

    8 November 2002


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 08 2002 - 07:22:28 EST