> There may or may not have been elements of propaganda involved. And the > design may or may not be poor. None of that changes the reality that the > symbol in question _has_ started to be used in commerce,
That's not true. The character ELOT asked to be encoded was never used. Or not for long. as the euro was adopted. I doubt there is much or any data using that character. > that government agencies are starting to expect ICTs to support the symbol, > and hence that implementers are for better or worse required to start > supporting it if they are to meet their users’ / customers’ needs. Perhaps you are not talking about the > We may like Unicode to be “pure” and aesthetically pleasing, but at the end > of the day what matters most is that it is practical. I do not particularly have an interest in "purity". I am most interested in practicality. M
