> >And the subscript / is over the edge, as far as I am concerned. > > U+208D and U+208E aren't.
Why not? That's like saying that U+2128 ANGSTROM SIGN is justification for adding further canonically equivelent characters. U+208D and U+208E were, as I understood it, added soley because some terminal supported them as characters and Unicode wanted to support that terminal. -- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
