- From: Sean M. Burke <sburke@cpan.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 22:47:05 -0600
- To: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-html-wg@w3.org, www-math@w3.org
At 12:49 2002-07-16 +0900, Masayasu Ishikawa wrote: > > >And I don't think comment inside an XHTML specification is the right > > >place to do so. > > 1) It wouldn't hurt. >It's a slippery slope. The W3C HTML Working Group is not the authority >of defining meaning/usage of characters. If it turns out that the W3C has taken some solemn oath that it would sooner fall on its swords than helpfully overreach its "scope" by one iota (or pi), then maybe I, a humble supplicant ignorant of its courtly ways, can convince it to simply add this descriptive line excerpted from entry 03d6 of the Holy Infallible And Incorrigible Unicode Standard (All Glory Be Upon It): "= greek small latter omega pi; used as a technical symbol; a variant of pi, looking like omega" As to slippery slopes: most things are, in fact, slippery slopes -- and if you start backing off from one thing because it's a slippery slope, who knows where you'll stop! I call this the "slippery slope argument against slippery slope arguments (except against itself)". One wonders if there is a Unicode symbol for "slippery slope" -- &x2333;&x0313; maybe? -- Sean M. Burke http://www.spinn.net/~sburke/
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 00:59:37 UTC