Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:26 PM, M Henri Day <> wrote:

Bernhard, you must have missed my most recent reply to Christian above. My
error was *not* in attempting to «reconvert» a hexadecimal representation to
yet another hexadecimal,

Yes, you did...

but rather in simply mistaking a decimal
representation (2204, which represents the same number as the hexdecimal

No - your mistake is to mistake 2204 as decimal.

089c), found as I explicitly noted, on p 1 of the Unicode table, as being
that of the Unicode glyph (∄) in question, whereas it codes for an entirely
different glyph.

But 2204 /is/ the (hex)representation of ∄

∄ = 2204₁₆ (hex) = 8708₁₀ (decimal)

but well, I guess that's clear now, I don't really know why I did
reply... Sorry for the noise.


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.