> Thanks. As a conclusion it seems that both Adobe's mapping of > U+03D5 and U+03C6 to glyph names and the Unicode annotation for > U+03D5 is incorrect (in case backwards compatibility is of > importance). > > The right mapping should be > > phi 03D5 > phi1 03C6
I have to correct myself, fortunately. After looking into the printed version of Unicode 2.0 I see that the glyphs of 03D5 and 03C6 in the file U0370.pdf are exchanged. Your assuption is correct that the annotation in Unicode 3.2 is wrong. Werner