The glyph there looks more like U+1D219 Greek vocal notation symbol-51: http://shapecatcher.com/unicode/info/119321 than a Ж.
If it was implemented as an overprint, either )^H|^H( or \^H|^H/ and was intended to signify an invalid character (for example, in the text part of core dumps, where a period is used by hexdump -C), then there would not be a physical key to generate it. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Ken Whistler via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > The 1620 manual accessed from the Wiki page shows the same information but > with a different glyph (which looks more like the capital zhe, and is > presumably the source of the glyph cited in the Wiki page itself). See: > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/1620/A26-5706-3_IBM_1620_CP > U_Model_1_Jul65.pdf > > p. 52 of the document (56/99 of the pdf). > > So there was some significant glyph variation in the 1620 documentation. > My guess is that the invalid character tofu was implemented as an overprint > symbol on the 1620 console typewriter (since the overlines and the > strikethroughs clearly were). The whole system was basically using only a > 50-character character set. But to verify exactly what was going on, > somebody would presumably have to examine the physical keys of a 1620 > console typewriter to see what they could generate on paper. > > I'm guessing the Computer History Museum ( http://www.computerhistory.org/ > ) would have one sitting around. > > --Ken > > > > On 9/25/2017 9:48 PM, Leo Broukhis via Unicode wrote: > >> Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_1620#Invalid_character) >> describes the "invalid character" symbol (see attachment) as a Cyrillic Ж >> which it obviously is not. >> >> But what is it? Does it deserve encoding, or is it a glyph variation of >> an existing codepoint? >> >> >
