On Sat 04 May 2019 at 21:16:25 (+0200), Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting David Wright (2019-05-04 20:14:12)
> > On Sat 04 May 2019 at 12:23:48 (-0400), Kenneth Parker wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 10:37 AM Erik Josefsson wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > And it works! Now I am just missing "|" and "¦".
> > >
> > > With US Keyboards, I see either of those characters, right of the
> > > "p" key.
> > > I was not aware that there were two, distinct characters.
> > >
> > > One of them ("|" on my current keyboard) is used as a "Pipe" symbol,
> > > for when I "pipe" the results of one command into another.
> > >
> > > Which?
> >
> > Pipe lies between { and } and is 7-bit ASCII, whereas the other one
> > lies between Yen and Section. I'm not sure why the OP wants to be able
> > to type it directly from one keystroke. Look at the company it keeps:
> > ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¨ © ª « ¬ ® ¯ ° ± ² ³ ´ µ ¶ · ¸ ¹ º » ¼ ½ ¾ ¿ À
> > We British are used to having £ available, but US keyboards don't
> > even have ¢.
>
> ¢ (ecu) is obsolete since many years.
Er. Americans still have cents (¢).
The ECU (₠) was never a real currency anyway. I never saw its symbol
being used in the wild. Its position is way down the Unicode table,
in the company of ₡ ₢ ₣ ₤ ₥ ₦ ₧ ₨ ₩ ₪ ₫ € ₭ ₮ ₯ ₰ ₱, currency signs
that I would have difficulty naming from their symbols, apart from—
> € (euro) is the current currency sign in some of EU.
>
> As for the original question I simply ignore the odd parts and focus on
> what I can sensibly contribute to: The pipe sign a.k.a. Unicode
> "vertical bar": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_bar
Is this some sort of ticking off for wondering why the OP is *so*
keen to be able to type ¦ directly on the keyboard that they are
almost willing to use a USB keyboard with a laptop to get it?
Particularly as the wiki page referred to above has a reference to
http://jkorpela.fi/latin1/3.html#A6
which states "It is advisable to avoid using this character, since its
code position is occupied by another character in ISO Latin 9 (alias
ISO 8859-15), which will probably widely replace ISO Latin 1 at least
in European usage."
Now, using Unicode might avoid this danger, but it's still odd to
want this character so much when it appears to be as much of a relic
as the aforementioned ECU is. And, after all, the answer is that
they didn't.
Cheers,
David.
