I think it was simpler: "X^H|" 2017-09-26 8:34 GMT+02:00 Leo Broukhis via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org>:
> The glyph there looks more like U+1D219 Greek vocal notation symbol-51: > http://shapecatcher.com/unicode/info/119321 > than a Ж. > > If it was implemented as an overprint, either )^H|^H( or \^H|^H/ and was > intended to signify an invalid character > (for example, in the text part of core dumps, where a period is used by > hexdump -C), then there would not be a physical key to generate it. > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Ken Whistler via Unicode < > unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > >> The 1620 manual accessed from the Wiki page shows the same information >> but with a different glyph (which looks more like the capital zhe, and is >> presumably the source of the glyph cited in the Wiki page itself). See: >> >> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/1620/A26-5706-3_IBM_1620_CP >> U_Model_1_Jul65.pdf >> >> p. 52 of the document (56/99 of the pdf). >> >> So there was some significant glyph variation in the 1620 documentation. >> My guess is that the invalid character tofu was implemented as an overprint >> symbol on the 1620 console typewriter (since the overlines and the >> strikethroughs clearly were). The whole system was basically using only a >> 50-character character set. But to verify exactly what was going on, >> somebody would presumably have to examine the physical keys of a 1620 >> console typewriter to see what they could generate on paper. >> >> I'm guessing the Computer History Museum ( http://www.computerhistory.org >> / ) would have one sitting around. >> >> --Ken >> >> >> >> On 9/25/2017 9:48 PM, Leo Broukhis via Unicode wrote: >> >>> Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_1620#Invalid_character) >>> describes the "invalid character" symbol (see attachment) as a Cyrillic Ж >>> which it obviously is not. >>> >>> But what is it? Does it deserve encoding, or is it a glyph variation of >>> an existing codepoint? >>> >>> >> >
