# Voided cross *The Urth list — 3 messages, 3 voices, 15 May 2005* > Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright > in each message remains with the person who wrote it. > Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original > archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than > retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact. --- ### Daniel D Jones *15 May 2005, 10:16* Is there a consensus of what the "voided cross" looks like in the BOTLS? --- ### pthwndxrclzp *15 May 2005, 11:46 · in reply to Daniel D Jones* I always figured it looked something like this (forgive the ASCII non-art): xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx x x xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx This also fits in with the "Sign of Addition" stuff, as far as I see it (though that may be so obvious it's not worth mentioning). Aq > On 5/15/05, Daniel D Jones wrote: > Is there a consensus of what the "voided cross" looks like in the BOTLS? > _______________________________________________ --- ### James Wynn *15 May 2005, 15:12 · in reply to Daniel D Jones* Like this: http://www.urth.org/whorlmap/voided_cross.htm The article is unfinished but the voided cross graphic is accurate, I believe. Crush ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel D Jones" > To: > Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2005 12:14 PM > Subject: (urth) Voided cross > Is there a consensus of what the "voided cross" looks like in the BOTLS? > _______________________________________________ ---