Okay, let's take a look at the context where the multiocular o was used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiocular_O https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiocular_O

Okay, let's take a look at the context where the multiocular o was used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiocular_O https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiocular_O I see that near it, there is an ef (Ф) with a very tall stem. Why should that not be included as a standard unicode character? Surely it is used more often than the multiocular o. You may say "it's a decorative flourish", which is of course true, but so is the multiocular o. Should we allow every conceivable decorative flourish into unicode? What is the standard for where flourishes become distinct characters?