> Of course not. But that's been a stated condition for labeling something > as "compatibility."
It *is* compatibility; go back and read my email where I mentioned exactly where it was used. ↪ Shervin On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Doug Ewell <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark Davis ☕️ <mark at macchiato dot com> wrote: > > >> In what character encoding standard, or extension, does ROBOT FACE > >> appear? > > > > Unicode has never been limited to what is in other character encoding > > standard or extensions, "official" or de facto. > > Of course not. But that's been a stated condition for labeling something > as "compatibility." > > -- > Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org > >
_______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
