On Friday 05 March 2010 21:09:31 Bill Hooper wrote: > On Mar 5 , at 6:05 PM, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > On Friday 05 March 2010 17:36:29 Bill Hooper wrote: > >> ... the same codes for various special characters ... like ... > >> the SI prefix micro-, l.c. mu (µ), > > > > The mu is not actually a mu > > (μ), ... but a micro sign (µ), > > I find it difficult to comprehend the statement that "the mu is not > actually a mu (µ)". If it looks like a mu it's a mu. They may come in > different styles (like italics, bold face, different type faces, etc.) but > they are all mu's.
They are the same glyph, but different character codes. If you look at the source code for the email message, you'll see that one is encoded as the bytes CE BC (in utf8), and the other is C2 B5. The bytes C2 B5 are utf8 for the number 181 (which is B5 in hex, but the extra byte is needed to tell how long the sequence is). p...@chausie:~/scoringsystem$ if [ µ = µ ] ; then echo same ; fi same p...@chausie:~/scoringsystem$ if [ µ = µ ] ; then echo same ; fi same p...@chausie:~/scoringsystem$ if [ μ = µ ] ; then echo same ; fi p...@chausie:~/scoringsystem$ if [ π = π ] ; then echo same ; fi same p...@chausie:~/scoringsystem$ if [ Ω = Ω ] ; then echo same ; fi same Other different characters that look alike are B, В, and Β. Their lowercase versions are b, в, and β. Why there is a separate code for the micro sign I don't know. Pierre -- .i toljundi do .ibabo mi'afra tu'a do .ibabo damba do .ibabo do jinga .icu'u la ma'atman.
