Inverted asterism

[Asmus Freytag]

Thanks for clearing that up.

A./

On 3/30/2023 3:13 PM, Steven R. Loomis wrote:
> The page has changed since we’ve started discussing it.
> - 
> https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page%3AMonthly_scrap_book%2C_for_February.pdf%2F24&diff=13108267&oldid=13107428 
> <https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Page%3AMonthly_scrap_book%2C_for_February.pdf%2F24&diff=13108267&oldid=13107428>
>
> It’s now «*⁎*»
>
> the original template is at 
> https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Template:Inverted_asterism
>
> --
> Steven R. Loomis
> Code Hive Tx, LLC
> https://codehivetx.us
>
>
>
>> On Mar 30, 2023, at 5:03 PM, Asmus Freytag via Unicode 
>> <unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/30/2023 9:54 AM, 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.
>>>
>> The primary reason would seem to be that no successful proposal has 
>> been submitted.
>>
>> A successful proposal would establish that this cannot be rendered 
>> with a simple text sequence and also that this usage isn't a one-off.
>>
>> As rendered on my browser, the transcription shows a text sequence, 
>> but with the defect of being composed using a five-pointed asterisk 
>> in the lower position. (I don't see any use of CSS).
>>
>> I note that the original lacks overlap which makes it impossible to 
>> be certain whether the typesetter used a single slug or three.
>>
>> In making an encoding decision, several determinations would have to 
>> be made.
>>
>> (1) does the attested usage rise to the level where encoding is 
>> warranted (or is this limited to a single document or otherwise not 
>> worth preserving in plain text)?
>>
>> (2) does the example represent a single glyph or a sequence?
>>
>> (3) if a sequence, is every element encoded?
>>
>> (4) if a single glyph, is it sufficient if it can be represented 
>> using some rich text? (italics, rotation, etc).
>>
>> We don't really have an algorithm yet for deriving these 
>> determinations unambiguously from the input data; it would be best if 
>> we had a proposal on record so we can have a disposition on record. 
>> Whether positive or negative, that would help settle future requests.
>>
>> At this point, there's a question whether the proposal should request 
>> a lower, six-pointed asterisk or a the inverted asterism, and whether 
>> it is possible to adduce enough data to help in making that decision.
>>
>> What we need for cases like this would be a place for proposals that 
>> are in a public "pending" state, so that people other than the 
>> proposer can adduce additional evidence over time without the need to 
>> immediately come down one way or the other.
>>
>> A./
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20230330/3d8d67a7/attachment.htm>