(12/01/10 6:40), Doug Ewell wrote: > I think the case would need to be made, as is usually necessary for > either formal or informal character proposals, that there is actually a > non-trivial population that wants or needs to use the proposed > "character" as plain text.
I sort of did a survey of this particular proposal (Upside-Down-Fu) on a Chinese mailing list dedicated to standards[1] and found the following data: * pingooo (In the Cc list) supports this proposal and claims that there's significant potential users, specifically Chinese families, comparable to Emoji users and users of some scripts that are in Unicode already. I think this sort of provides evidence to the statement that "there is actually a non-trivial population that wants to 'have' the proposed character as plain text" although I am not clear if this can turn into "wants or needs to use". * Three folks think this is rather unnecessary (including me). Some people go more and say "What about a code point for XXX and YYY?" * Ambrose (In the Cc list) thinks this character shouldn't go into Enclosed Ideographic Supplement. * pingooo thinks if we are to add this, we should add U+6625 春 （spring） CJK UNIFIED IDEOGRAPH-6625 too. I had the same opinion earlier in this thread I am ignorant about the Unicode process but I hope this data helps to make a judgment call. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-ig-zh/ Cheers, Kenny
