I'd say it's pretty accurate what clamdigger says.  Symbols without a 'glossary' to describe their meanings are useless and dangerous (as all programers know all to well :D ).

Anything from someone ending up explaining something in symbols, which's meanings he can't explain sufficiently to literature reffering unclear symbols are that way; the first case being when someone is considered crazy and the second being that genuine muslim "stone the sinners", and I don't think I need to explain where the problem is.

I've had my share of dissapointment, when I included infinitely* complex hidden meanings in the symbols of a poem I wrote and then never met a person who understood even one of the ones I put in.

[size=9]* = Yes, litterately infinite. The poem is in slovenian so you won't be able to understand it if I post it here, but to explain: Infinite number of possible interpretations (atho all but three may ultimately seem dull) was reached by the poem defining a symbol that is defined as the poem itself, as well as the abstract and litteral interpretations. So, the poem defines a symbol as something beautyfull in written form and that while the symbol does not physically exist anymore (paganism has been rooted from the country I live in a couple thousand years ago), it exists wherever you find it and so if you look for it you find the poem and so if the poem is the symbol and the symbol is the poem and beauty and if you can chase the meaning of this symbol in an infinite loop, there is also infinite beauty in it.[/size]