On 13 Jul 2012, at 11:07, Julian Bradfield wrote:
> On 2012-07-12, Michael Everson <everson_at_evertype.com> wrote:
>> On 12 Jul 2012, at 22:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
>>
>>> But wanting to do so would be crazy. My mu-nu ligature is, as far as I know, used only by me (and co-authors who let me do the typesetting), and so if Unicode has any sanity left, it would not encode it.
>>
>> Is it in print?
>
> Of course it's in print. The true ligature is only in the tech reports and preprints that I produced myself (e.g. http://www.lfcs.inf.ed.ac.uk/reports/98/ECS-LFCS-98-385/index.html ). The journal versions have a hacked symbol which is just mu nu kerned to overlap appropriately. Sadly, this was before the days when TeX systems were sufficiently well standardized that one had a fighting chance of including fonts with the papers!
So... U+1D7CC MATHEMATICAL ITALIC SMALL MU NU LIGATURE, since it's published and (assuming the work is worthy; I cannot judge) might be cited by others.
>>> My colleagues in the Edinburgh PEPA group did try to get their pet symbol encoded (a bowtie where the two triangles overlap somewhat rather than just touching), but were refused; although that symbol now appears in hundreds of papers by dozens of authors from all over the world.
>>
>> If so, then it should be encoded.
>
> The relevant person is on holiday at the moment, but I'll find out from him the real story of the symbol. I think this was before the supplementary planes opened up.
Please do.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Received on Fri Jul 13 2012 - 05:26:09 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Jul 13 2012 - 05:26:09 CDT