Originally Posted by VydorScope
My apologies, I did not mean to come across that way. I cannot come up with a way to continue a quest for understanding the desire to use a marker that is not common, and the New Yorker themselves says "The diaeresis is the single thing that readers of the letter-writing variety complain about most," with out sounding attacking (which I do not want to do) so I will drop it completely.
I don't mean to offend you either, but I feel I must comment on this.
While I appreciate your sentiment, the above response seems conflicted at best. If you were uninterested in having the last word on the relevance of my question, then why would you bother quoting the New Yorker
in support of your previous point (and, again, making controversy the metonym of rarity)?
However, since I'd prefer to take you at your word, and a friend is far more valuable than a potentially irked forum member, let's move on, as you say.
Thanks for the additional verification. Yes, I did know it was used in UTF-8, and therefore in extended ASCII, but I don't want to overlook any omissions in any fonts which are commonly used on readers. One of the Sonys I checked does use fonts which were installed with the custom firmware and which don't seem to reproduce the mark I wish to include.
When I get home from work, I'll reformat the text I was checking and have a look at the offending fonts again. I'll even name names