also interrobang is rendered as bang-interro (!?) when it should be interro (?) then bang (!) -> (?!)

zamadatix 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There isn't a "correct" way to incorrectly render the interrobang as 2 separate characters. The name was never supposed to suggest a certain ordering instead of just being both at the same time. The name "interrobang" just sounded better than "exclamaquest" (or any of the alternatives Type Talks readers submitted).

	▲	bobson381 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Huh, interesting. I retract my previous statement! I'd love to read about this if you have a source.

▲

egypturnash 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No, it should be rendered with the proper Unicode: U+203D ‽

▲

spelufo 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

do you really think so?!

I think bang-interro just didn't sound as nice and that's probably why it is called an interrobang.