Bruce Pourciau wrote:
> Yes, George. Thank you! Where did you find it? Is there a
> comprehensive list of ding{} symbols you could point me to? It's odd
> that the fleuron labled ding{166} in Pakin's list does not look like
> the fleuron that you actually get with ding{166}.
I looked up how the symbol looks like at
http://www.decodeunicode.org/U+2766. Then I searched in the dingbat section
in
http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/info/symbols/comprehensive/symbols-a4.pdf
and found the symbol at p. 56. Here I get exactly the same output as in the
symbols file.
Georg
