<div dir="auto">And it would pretty odd to call a real symbol a “variation” of one that has never been in use.</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 1:34 PM Asmus Freytag via Unicode <<a href="mailto:unicode@corp.unicode.org">unicode@corp.unicode.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<div>It's not only about whether users know
what a variation selector is or is not.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Use of a variation selector for two
shapes implies that they are the *same symbol*. For something like
slanted vs. upright integrals, it's easy to assert that they are
the same symbol and not two symbols that represent the same
concept. Hence the use of variation selectors.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For other concepts, there are often
multiple symbols representing them. Pound, for example, is
abbreviated with a ligated lb that has it's own character code,
but also with # on occasion. It would have been exceedingly
disingenuous to make the lb ligature a variant of the #. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Just because some concepts map 1:1 to
symbols it's not a sufficient condition for suggesting the use of
variation selector. Anytime where symbol shapes show significant
deviation, the presumption ought to be that we are looking at two
symbols for the same concept, which both deserve to be encoded.</div></div><div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A./<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On 1/3/2024 9:11 AM, Doug Ewell via
Unicode wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">I personally support Kirk Miller's proposal to add
the more commonly used symbols as separate characters, rather <span>than
complicating the encoding by adding variation selectors to
change the glyph to something quite different.</span></div>
<div dir="auto"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div dir="auto"><span>We don't always realize it, but ordinary
users generally don't know anything about variation selectors.</span></div>
<div dir="auto"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div dir="auto"><span>—Doug</span></div>
<div dir="auto"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div id="m_-4029664403696671655ms-outlook-mobile-signature" dir="auto">Sent via the
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone<br>
Get <a href="https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg" target="_blank">Outlook
for Android</a></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="m_-4029664403696671655divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
Unicode <a href="mailto:unicode-bounces@corp.unicode.org" target="_blank"><unicode-bounces@corp.unicode.org></a> on behalf of
Marius Spix via Unicode <a href="mailto:unicode@corp.unicode.org" target="_blank"><unicode@corp.unicode.org></a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 3, 2024 9:09:14 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:unicode@corp.unicode.org" target="_blank">unicode@corp.unicode.org</a>
<a href="mailto:unicode@corp.unicode.org" target="_blank"><unicode@corp.unicode.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Reference glyphs of musical accidentals
quarter sharp and quarter flat</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt">
<div>Hi,<br>
<br>
I just noted that the reference glyphs for<br>
<br>
U+1D132 MUSICAL SYMBOL QUARTER TONE SHARP<br>
<br>
and<br>
<br>
U+1D133 MUSICAL SYMBOL QUARTER TONE FLAT<br>
<br>
on the code chart are very unusual. In the standard
notation, the<br>
quarter sharp is represented by U+266F with only one
downstroke and the<br>
quarter flat by a mirrored version of U+266D MUSIC FLAT
SIGN (or as a<br>
variant of U+266D with a stroke). Please find the attached
image for<br>
reference.<br>
<br>
I had a look at the mailing list and there was already a
suggestion by<br>
Johnny Farraj in 2015, by Markus Scherer in 2018 and by
Gavin Jared Bala<br>
and Kirk Miller in 2023 (request L2/23-276). The letter
also includes<br>
the currently missing characters for three-quarter sharp
and<br>
three-quarter flat, two characters I also see an urgent
need for.<br>
<br>
Howerver, in contrast to that request, I propose to unify
two suggested<br>
characters with existing ones and change the reference
glyph instead of<br>
encoding a new character instead.<br>
<br>
U+1D1ED MUSICAL SYMBOL REVERSED FLAT (requested) = U+1D133
MUSICAL<br>
SYMBOL QUARTER TONE FLAT (existing)<br>
U+1D1EB MUSICAL SYMBOL HALF SHARP (requested) = U+1D133
MUSICAL SYMBOL<br>
QUARTER TONE FLAT (existing)<br>
<br>
The stroked variant of the quarter flat (which does not
appear in<br>
the proposal of Gavin Jared Bala and Kirk Miller, but can
be found in<br>
several pieces) could be obtained by combining U+1D132
MUSICAL SYMBOL<br>
QUARTER TONE SHARP with a variation selector (e. g.
U+FE00).<br>
<br>
What do you think?<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
Marius<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div>