RE: logos, symbols, and ligatures (RE: Encoding Personal Use Ideographs)

John H. Jenkins wrote:
> I really doubt that the UTC would ever consent to encoding additional  
> Latin ligatures any more than it would encode additional precomposed  
> accented Latin letters.  The ones that we have are present in the  
> standard for the sole purpose of providing round-trip compatibility  
> with older standards (e.g., MacRoman).

And yet the UTC, as well as WG2, seems to be in the process of adopting 100+
Hangul Jamo that are aren't even ligature-like, but each just represents a sequence
of Hangul conjoining letters.

		/kent k