On May 22, 2012, at 08:18, Shriramana Sharma wrote: > Any reason why the glyph of the current existing character 20A4 ₤ LIRA > SIGN could not have been changed instead? The glyph is similar to that > of 00A3 £ POUND SIGN, and 20A4 was *anyway* not used in favour of > 00A3, so it's not as if any other users of the lira would object > (unlike in the case of the rupee sign).
I seem to recall that U+20A4 LIRA SIGN was intended for the *Italian* lira. Besides, the new Turkish lira sign is clearly meant to be a brand new currency sign not derived from ₤, thus discounting unification. And you can't just replace ₤ with ₺ because of Unicode's stability policy. (Personally, I don't understand the current hubbub about inventing new currency signs, but whatever.) —Ben Scarborough
