Ernest Cline wrote...
> Consider for example, a font that offered both of the common glyph
> variants of PLUTO. At present, one would be have to be encoded as
> U+2647 and the other as a private use character, say U+E647.
Well, not necessarily. Depending on your system, one of them could just be
handled in mark-up as a swash variant (or whatever). There is nothing in
the Unicode Standard that would require that situation to force encoding
one of the variants in the PUA. There are many fonts that offer glyph
variants of things, and don't require putting them in the PUA. But you do
need a system that knows how to deal with such fonts.
Rcik
