Aw: Re: Inverted asterism

[Marius Spix]

This is not font-specific. They use the rotate() css function. It seems that the typesetter also used three separate glyphs. That “reversed asterism” is 3 en wide and does not overlap like the reference glyph for the asterism. 

> Gesendet: Donnerstag, den 30.03.2023 um 20:10 Uhr
> Von: "James Kass via Unicode" <unicode at corp.unicode.org>
> An: unicode at corp.unicode.org
> Betreff: Re: Inverted asterism
> 
> 
> 
> On 2023-03-30 4:54 PM, David Starner via Unicode wrote:
> > There doesn't seem to be an inverted asterism in Unicode. Is there a
> > good reason there's not?
> > https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Monthly_scrap_book,_for_February.pdf/24
> > shows the example I have at hand, from an 1832 English-language
> > periodical from Scotland.
> >
> Looking at it in the browser, the two 'stacked asterisks' match. 
> Copy/pasting the line into a plain-text editor (which uses a different 
> font) shows one asterisk above and two below.
> 
>       ⁂ The above short Hints were submitted to the ...
> 
> Would this be considered a glyph variant, or a separate character? Are 
> the two forms ever used contrastively in the same source?
>