> On Sun, 2/7/16, Asmus Freytag <[email protected]> wrote: >>On 2/7/2016 4:02 AM, David Faulks wrote: <text cut> >> 29EC ⧬ WHITE CIRCLE WITH DOWN ARROW is in >> *Miscellaneous Mathematical Symbols-B* and has the >> category Sm, and all of the fonts I have which display it use >> a glyph identical to the unicode code charts. The Eris >> symbol—the one people are using—has a circle relativly >> smaller, but I thought that that was not considered a good >> enough reason to justify a new codepoint. > Yes and no. For mathematical fonts, it's often important > that different circles relate in size. How does Eris relate to > Earth in astrological fonts? Is there a clear relation, whether > same size or one always being smaller? Imagine what would > happen for a font that covers both mathematical use and > astrology? > Would a designer be forced to choose which user > community to accommodate?
This is somewhat difficult to judge. I don't think astrologers would find the current glyph for U+29EC unacceptable, but the glyph typically being used has the circle smaller than Mars, Venus, and either of the two Earth symbols. Sometimes, an oval is used instead of a circle. However, some styles for astrology symbols have very large circles. <text cut> > So, depending on the facts of how this symbol is used, > there may well be good reasons to not equate it with the > mathematical character - but that also means you'll need to > understand what the latter was encoded for (which you can > find by searching the document register). I've found the proposals (from 2000), but many symbols there have no explained use, including U+29EC. If the members of this mailing list think a proposal including a separate Eris symbol is acceptable, I will include it in my proposal. Along with, perhaps, some additional symbols... >A./ David
