Re: Euro - re-statement

Tim Bagot (timothy.bagot@keble.oxford.ac.uk)
Fri, 17 Oct 1997 14:28:09 +0100 (BST)


Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 14:28:09 +0100 (BST)
From: Tim Bagot <timothy.bagot@keble.oxford.ac.uk>
To: HTML mailing list <www-html@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <199710171051.GAA07584@unix.asb.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.96.971017141454.12217A-100000@sable.ox.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: RE: Euro - re-statement



On Fri, 17 Oct 1997, Rob wrote:

> On 16 Oct 97, Tim Bagot <timothy.bagot@keble.oxford.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> > I agree that the universal currency symbol is much less useful than the
> > vertical bar. I do not believe that it is necessary to put the symbol in
> > the 7-bit character set - the pound sign, for instance, is found only in
> > the 8-bit set, along with a lot of accented letters, which are much
> > more important to the Europeans than the Euro symbol, which can if
> > necessary just be replaced by the letter E without confusion.
> 
> Replacing the pound sign w/the euro-symbol? Aren't a lot of people in the 
> UK edgy about monetary union as it is?
> 
> Rob

I think I may have been misunderstood; I apologise for the ambiguity of
what I wrote. I was actually suggesting that the Euro symbol might replace
the little-used universal currency sign, rather than the vertical bar. I
was just mentioning the pound sign as an example of a currency symbol that
is in the upper part of the character set, and I don't see why the Euro
should have to be in the lower part when the pound isn't. 

Even in the VERY unlikely event that Britain joins EMU right at the
beginning, the pound sign will still be necessary for a short time, even
after the initial transition period. And, of course, we aren't the only
country to use the pound sign.

Tim Bagot