On 22 Aug 2012, at 18:05, Jameson Quinn wrote: > I understand that from a professional Mayanist perspective, having glyphs for > just the numbers without even the dates or any of the rest isn't attractive. > And I also understand that in real petroglyphs, 1 and 2 (for instance) > usually look more like ∪•∪ and •∪• than like the simplified • and •• that > I'd suggest for the basic glyphs. But I can say confidently that there are > audiences who would use these glyphs, certainly more than a lot of what's in > Unicode.
Try it out in the PUA for a while. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
