The `footmisc` package describes 3 additional systems in which one can apply numbering to footnotes in a paper:

> 
> bringhurst: ∗, †, ‡, §, ||, ¶.
> 
> 
> chicago: ∗, †, ‡, §, ||, #.
> 
> 
> wiley: ∗, ∗∗, †, ‡, §, ¶, ||.
> 
> 
> 

This is in addition to these methods:

> 
> arabic numerals: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
> 
> 
> roman numerals: I, II, III, IV, V.
> 
> 
> letters: a, b, c, d, e.
> 
> 
> 

For my purposes, I think a system such as bringhurst, chicago, or wiley are suitable, because custom symbols are used:

* Arabic numerals appear to frequently throughout my document already.
* I can't find single-character unicode roman numerals exceeding 12. When rendered in XeTex, numbers above (such as "ⅫⅡ") appear with an added space.
* The letters in the alphabet look too much like the text of the document.

However, I find that the bringhurst, chicago, or wiley systems has some problems:

* They are limited to 6 or 7 symbols. I need at least 30, if not more.
* They do not appear to follow a logical pattern explaining the order or shape.
* They use symbols such as ¶, § and #, which I think usually carry very different meanings.

Are there any other sets of symbols within LaTeX's packages or from unicode which you think could make good footnote marks?