On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Michael Everson wrote: > I think it's cute. But I guess I'd call it "tri". > -- > Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com > Thanks, good suggestion! Don Tucker pointed out the stability of a three-legged stool. It has to be one-syllable, though tri does have a certain "3"-ness to it.
David Starner's constructive suggestion: >Get it in use, and then the Unicode standard will encode it. is at the same time somewhat a Catch-22. Nelson Beebe recommended it since he figured unicode 3.2 would be the make or break for "getting it in use". I'd be curious if you disagree with the thesis that a symbol for 6.28 has scientific/mathematical merit (in comparison 3.14...), and if so why? I was hoping someone would contend this point when it was published, since I am interested to learn any conceptual advantages of 3.14... other than historical inertia, but no one did. Historical inertia prevents elimination of the error, but I'm just suggesting an alternate might be nice. The Lituanian Math Journal asked to translate and reprint it, although that probably doesn't qualify as "in use". It was also accepted "in use" in the Mathematical Association of America's refereed Journal of Online Mathematics www.joma.org/more/palaismore.html where the one revolution periodicity and 1/4 phase shifts are represented and the graphs are labelled more simply with this symbol. The response to the article chosen for publication also notes the evangelical (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) tone: "I agree with Bob Palais' \pi -ous article but it might be 2 \pi- ous" :-)
