<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto">James Kass via Unicode <unicode@corp.unicode.org><br><br><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><span>The Wikipedia page linked earlier,</span><br><span>... suggests using the German pfennig symbol (₰) as a substitute for the krul. Evidence that U+20B0 GERMAN PENNY SIGN is being used as a krul in real world computer data interchange could be helpful to a proposal.</span><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The page on Dele / Deleatur is suggesting the very same. (By that, I don’t want to suggest they should be unified.)</div><div><br></div><div>If existingg digital use by some kind of substitute could be satisfactorily demonstrated for one of those signs, wouldn’t that mean that the whole class of conventionalized proofreader‘s and teacher’s marks should be acceptable for encoding? Would a combined proposal have better chances for approval (not least because they could be put in a new block together)?</div><div><br></div><div>How much would it matter if fonts already existed that covered some of these marks, probably in PUA? </div><div><br></div><a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proofreader%27s_marks">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proofreader%27s_marks</a><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><span></span></div></blockquote></body></html>