On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote: > > In my opinon the shape visible inside a a side effect of the paper > texture, with inking defects the same size as those visible on the > surrounding letters. > > My opinion is that the symbol inside the large square is a central > square dot normally completely filled. Just consider how the top-left > corner of the outer square is partially drawn (it was clearly intended > to have a regular thick stroke width) : the missing ink is even larger > than the smaller defects on the central shape.
I can admit that; say, it was a U+25A3. Is there any tradition of its non-ornamental, maybe anthroponymic-related use in reference or religious literature? Thanks, Leo
