<a bit tongue-in-cheek>
Perhaps the Ewellic forms should be used rather than risk the possibility of being perceived as ASCII-centric? http://www.evertype.com/standards/csur/ewellic.html All we'd need to do is wait for Doug Ewell to provide the glyphs for hexadecimal digits ten through fifteen and wait for CSUR to assign code points other than the former Shavian block. As for input, these could be entered the same way any other Unicode character is entered. Likewise for handling legacy conversions. </a bit tongue-in-cheek> As for existing ambiguity, perhaps style books should be strict with hexadecimal notation. Unicode example: (畺) Always U+757A, never U+757a (and never U+757А or other variations). Best regards, James Kass.
