Marco Cimarosti wrote:

>
> Michael Everson wrote (on unicode@...):
> > At 08:56 -0400 2001-05-16, Martin Heijdra wrote:
> > >There was a photo in Sunday's New York Times. The long article (more
> > >informative than the one cited here), but not the photo, is
> > on its Web site.
> > >It was a seal with 4 signs.

There is *absolutely no* warrant for thinking this is "writing," any
more than the Vinc^a signs are "writing." Only if more examples turn up,
so that any analysis at all is possible, could that even be considered.

> > Which you are scanning in and posting up on a site so we can have a
> > look, right?
>
> Yes, it would be great to see the photo. The rest of the article is here:
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/13/science/13LOST.html?searchpv=site03&pagewa
> nted=all
>
> In order to read it, one has to register and get an id & password. (Typical
> of our age: our privacy is violated even just for reading a newspaper!)

I registered with the New York Times once, years ago, and did not "get
an id" and do not have to use a password. AFAICT there has been no
undesired e-mail as a result.

Please note that by reading the Times at the website you have avoided
paying 75c for a copy of the paper ($3.50 on Sunday), and they are
entitled to let their advertisers know that readers are in fact being
exposed to the advertisements. That's what pays for the web access.

> I wanted to forward it to these mailing lists, but the NYT copyright notice
> is quite clear in that articles can only be downloaded for "private use".

Good for you for not forwarding the article, but bad people do it all
the time.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...