Gerhard: I am well aware of how the eszett is applied and how the
preceding vowel is pronounced. I had to learn the eszett rule, and its
many exceptions for four years, one hour a week as part of my training
as a typesetter thirty years ago. I understand that the meaning of the
word changes
very subjective
(1) About Switzerland’s ß-substitution: In German there’s a fairly rigid
coherence between how you write a word an how you speak it. And a basic rule
(not without exceptions, but very few) is, that a vowel before a doubled
consonant is spoken short. So the word « Floss » (in
Gerhard, you still keep saying that the capital ẞ is just like all other
capital letters, even though I have demonstrated that it is not (by
definition of the standards). You say it is used as a standalone letters
in URLs.
I concede that the capital ẞ has sometimes been used as a standalone
My apologies, Bruno, for perhaps overstating what I perceived to be your
affinity to certain ẞ designs. As often in life, this too may be a case
where we have to settle for acceptable instead of likable.
You are correct, of course, in stating that type designers have the
opportunity (and perhaps
Off-topic: Arabic/Hebrew demonstrate how the vowels can become almost
optional extras except for ambiguous situations, but ẞ is there for
ambiguous situations too. Perhaps it should melt away in the same way
that a vowel does; being entirely what is expected it won't be seen.
Bruno: whatever
Paul: indeed what a great idea. Who knows, by the end of this exercise I
might even become an Eszett advocate! ;-)
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/650498
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Switzerland demonstrates you may perfectly well write German without any
ß at all.
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/650498
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
Thorsten - like is too strong a word. I would put it as 'accepting'. :-)
I agree that readers have expectations and that as a commercial type
foundry I have to yield to such expectations to a certain degree. But at
the same time it is our job as designers to improve a situation and I
strongly
Indeed: We read best what we are used to reading. That's why a barred S
is unacceptable: It does not look like an ß at all. And that's also why
I think the M+ shape is not a good choice: It is too different from an ß
– what is that strange B-ish letter?
Bruno, you have said you didn't like
There is yet another argument in favour of the Duden form that I forgot
to mention:
The Ubuntu Font Family's small letter ß clearly has the form of an ſs
ligature because it has an s-like shape. So I think consistency in the
typeface should demand that the capital letter take the same form
Dear mach,
I don’t think your arguments are as valid as they seem. Personally I
prefer the Dresdner Form of the ẞ but I’m open for facts to convince me.
Allow myself to question your points.
1) The Dresden Form does only lean forward or topple, if it is purely
designed. As you can see in the
And here the comparision of the ẞes on my computer.
** Attachment added: vsz-vergleich.jpg
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-font-family-sources/+bug/650498/+attachment/1748762/+files/vsz-vergleich.jpg
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
Here's a comparison with other fonts.
** Attachment added: comparison.others.png
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-font-family-sources/+bug/650498/+attachment/1748780/+files/comparison.others.png
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
I concur that both shapes can be done bad or well. Espicifically, with
regard to the Duden form, I readily agree that the DejaVu Sans ẞ is
definitly inferior to the original Duden ẞ.
With regard to the Dresden form, I think that in addition to a rounded
top left corner, the top right corner
It is a joy to see how much emotions can be stirred by something as
seemingly insignificant like a letter design! Irrespective of which is
the prefered version discussed currently, I feel that hardly any of
these sit comfortably with the capital letterforms. My feeling is tha
the reason is
Thanks for your comparison, Denis! There you can see how poorly
Microsoft (or ascender fonts?) designed their ẞ. It looks like you took
the ß and put it between the capitals.
That’s what I meant with »differing from the capital version«, mach. ẞ
and ß should be differ so much, that you can
Gerhard Großmann, you are comparing the pair ẞ/ß to normal
uppercase/lowercase pairs such as K/k or F/f. However, it is not, as can
be seen both in the Unicode Standard and in the proposal to add it to
the Unicode Standard ( http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3227.pdf
). When you convert the
The only place I've seen capital eszett used on its own ...is a tag for
the Flickr group:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/386...@n21/pool/tags/%E1%BA%9E/ (ẞ)
Going through the Signographie archives, this article is of interest (in
English):
Uppercase Sharp S Issues - by Dr Asmus Freytag
Bruno: if you like the ẞ glyphs in Old Standard, Calluna and M+, I’m
sure we’re on the right track. :-)
I’m not so sure, on the other hand, how helpful the sometimes heated
debates about ſS vs. ſʒ vs. ſ3 really are. These debates raged in
Germany for years, the different sides dug in, but in the
I think the ẞ glyph should look like the Duden ẞ, and not like Andreas
Strötzner's Dresden form.
The Duden ẞ has only one angle, and a part of it looks similar to an S:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/2/2b/Eszett_Leipziger_Duden_1957.png
The Dresden form has two angles, and a part of it
Re Paul's design study: looks good! (I'm assuming that you favor the
version used in the sample line, “WEIẞE … STRAẞE”.)
At the risk of pointing out the obvious: an SS-ligature would be
inappropriate for a UI font. The official ISO/IEC 10646 proposal points
out that “We need the capital ẞ … to
Thorsten: I'm sorry to say that I can't remember which the favourite
was. The origin of that study is that I'd done a full sheet of
experiments and working when I was in Berlin and showed it around odd
people just to get an initial gauge of what people /expected/. This was
mainly for my own
Of those presented in Paul's study I like the capital Eszetts with the lower
arc similar to the lower part of the S. There are two of them and somehow I
cannot find a difference. Is there any difference at all?
But I am afraid that these Eszetts do not harmonize with surrounding capital
letters
Finally had some time to look at the PDF.
I think the one in the text with the top aligned (and not descending
from top left to top right like the three at the lower left of the page)
look quite ok.
I have the perception that the glyph is a bit too wide.
The question is if the glyph can be made
The top left being round is intended, I would say. This is one of the features
that distinguishes it from capital B.
I think the biggest problem is to work out the difference between the capital
Eszett and the capital B.
And yes the character really looks a bit wide. But in my eyes, that is not
Joshua: I am not about to start the entire debate again, but your
conclusion is somewhat offensive. It is just about the entire
typographic community that questions the wisdom of it being long-s and
z, instead of long-s and short-s.
Paul: Yes, movement is good, thank you. And I am not going to
I'm sorry if I did offend anyone, this was not my intension. As you
surely noticed, English isn't my native tongue, which is a potential
source of misunderstandings for which I apologize.
In the German type historian community, Brekle's work, which explains
that the Fraktur-Eszett's origins are a
Joshua: apology accepted - my reaction was in response to the finality
of your statement. I think, for the time being we agree to disagree and
hopefully my capital versions will be persuasive.
Thank you for your compliment - we're really excited working with the
Canonical team, and of course the
Please look at the attached graphic. There you see three proposals for
the form of the Antiqua-Eszett from 1879. For me, it's obvious that all
three forms are variations on the same theme: they are all modelled
after the Fraktur Eszett, but vary in the way the Fraktur z is connected
to the long s.
It is great to see the enthusiasm here and those contributing have
exceeded my domain-knowledge, which means that unfortunately in reading
this I have to rely on the secondary sources that are presented.
In best Wikipedia fashion, if people wish to maintain a stance or point-
of-view, please
I absolutely agree. So for everyone interested let me recommend another
source (besides the mentioned article of Prof. Dr. Brekle and the
Zeitschrift für Deutschlands Buchdrucker (1903, 9th of Juli)
containing the official announcement of the new Antiqua-Eszett):
Signa Nr. 9, Das große Eszett,
In the interests of getting some useful movement here:
** Attachment added: capital-eszett-1.pdf
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-font-family-sources/+bug/650498/+attachment/1741988/+files/capital-eszett-1.pdf
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
The z in Poppelbaum's Eszett is a latinized Fraktur z. I hope the
attached graphic makes the construction of the Eszett clear to you.
While such forms exist, there is no need for a ligature of s and z (ezh)
to have a descender or a connection as is in the Fraktur form.
Poppelbaum's Eszett is
Well, trying to calm things abit down ...
Joshua is right when he says, that the ß today is no ligature, is not
used as one and doesn't carry any of the specific meaning of a ligature
(typographical enhancement, equivalence to decomposed character pair,
etc.).
David is right when he says that
David Marshall:
Sorry, it's you who isn't correct.
In the 19th century, as in Germany more and more Antiqua was used, the
need for a latin Eszett arose. There were many proposals and after live
discussions in the Journal für Buchdruckerkunst in 1879, the
Typographische Gesellschaft Leipzig
(Sorry for double-posting by accident.)
Poppelbaum's ß (you can see it in the graphic attached to my previous
post) was official since its acceptance by the mixed commission.
It was only later, that some type designers began to use the form of an
ſs ligature, believing Tschichold's wrong
In the official announcement of the Commission in the Zeitschrift für
Deutschlands Buchdrucker (1903, 9th of Juli), the form of the new
Eszett is explained as follows:
Das sogenannte lange Antiqua-ſ wird oben mit einem z verbunden, im
Kopfe eingebogen und läuft im unteren Bogen in eine feine oder
Why do you need something in that slot? Because people use that
codepoint.
Ho does it has to look like? Thorsten already has some good links. I want to
add:
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=206693id=47874590367
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=123593id=47874590367
Bruno, please try to
In many instances new letters were made up to represent a specific sound
in a particular language that wasn't covered by the existing alphabet.
The most obvious example are diacritics - which I would argue the R with
tail is. Many of these characters came to life, particularly in Africa,
during
Bruno Maag, you seem to be very badly informed.
To begin with, the German Eszett is *not* a ligature of long and short s. Such
a ligature arose in the Italian humanist script, but it has nothing to do with
the German Eszett. During the High German consonant shift, the germanic t
partially
Bruno et al.,
Ubuntu needs a glyph at U+1E9E, simply for practical reasons. Feel free
to skip to my last paragraph for those practical considerations. I'm
also adding some context above that.
While it is understandable that speakers of Swiss German (some 5 million
people) see little use for the
** Attachment added: Screenshot of all-caps text rendered in Ubuntu, with
automatically interspersed fall-back glyphs from DejaVu Sans for U+1E9E
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-font-family/+bug/650498/+attachment/1738570/+files/ubuntu-with-fall-back-U1E9E-from-dejavu-sans.png
--
Yes, there has to be something in that slot, David. But I can’t support
your antipathy against the proposed form of the capital ß. It’s
definetely not “a strange and distorted ‘big’ version of ß”. Maybe you
judge it as a wired form BECAUSE you aren’t German speaker an aren’t
used to it. Think
This discussion went on for several years in Germany (and, to a limited
extent, in typography circles beyond). Virtually all imaginable
alternatives were discussed, incl., but not limited to, ligatures of
capital letters (SS or SZ), S or Z reversed, S or Z with diacritical
marks. All were
Note: for those interested, I spent an afternoon walking graveyards and
visiting a stonemason in Germany before I left. The stonemason
eventually got quite interested and demonstrated what they tend to do.
Their workflow is mainly based upon compuer-paper plot-hand-held sand
blaster.
If they're
Dave: Gravestones seem to be the other good test of acceptability, as
these are normally written in uppercase.
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/650498
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
IMO, the addition of the cap Eszettt was idiotic in the first place. It
is typographically and grammatically incorrect. The eszett is a
lowercase ligature made up of long-s and short-s and, really, is a
historical character. In the past other languages, incl English and
French used to use an
Not implementing U+1E9E ẞ as a capital letter sharp s is rather radical.
In Unicode U+1E9E ẞ has for lowercase U+00DF LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S
But U+00DF ß has no defined uppercase.
This means uppercasing strings like Maße will usually give MAßE.
Some software might give a different uppercase
Denis, I have no problems with people having freedom to decide what's
right or wrong for them, as long as their actions do not affect the
freedom of others. In the case of eszett, I believe that instead of
adding a uppercase version, the Duden folks should have abandoned the
lowercase eszett
You might as well not fill in the codepoint.
The whole point of LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E) is that some
people don't consider eszett as a pure ligature of long-s and s, but
rather as something special that stemmed from that ligature.
The fact that Maße and Masse are two different
The sharp s is a character, NOT A LIGATURE!
A ligature is a typographical refinement to improve the appearance of two
letters appearing next to each other.
The most important aspect of a ligature is that it doesn't change the meaning
of words.
Yes, the sharp s WAS a ligature once. But w was
** Tags added: uff-unicode-5.1
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/650498
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
My understanding is that pre-reform there were the two transformations
(Große Duden, Sixteen ed., East Germany, 1969); SZ being used instead of
SS where there was ambiguous or conflicting word in the case of
capitalisation; eg:
Busse→BUSSE
Buße→BUSZE
Post reform, the /transform/ is based on
soc says: PS: Could we just leave out that ß-hating here? It has nothing
to do with that particular topic here?
I think it has very much to do with the topic at hand. It is about
quality. As much as some people argue that a specific cap eszett should
be designed we should equally consider the
First I want to apologize to everyone in this thread if he or she felt I
worded my arguments in a too confrontational way. Denis' and Paul's
comments are good examples of staying calm, a behavior which I should
try to achieve next time.
Dear Bruno,
I also have strong feelings about language,
David: What you propose is sensible; although I believe that a treatment
of ß and SS will differ significantly in width. We're aiming for long-
term metrics stability of included coverage between major releases, so
while we can update glyph and hinting data it is going to be very hard
work to
Hi David,
although I prefer a more distinct appearance of the Versaleszett to two S
combined, I would love to be able to see the ideas you prefer.
It is important that this letter fits naturally into the font, so I'm
interested if it can be done in an aesthetically pleasing way.
Judging from
soc, please don't take my arguments as a personal affront.Like yourself,
I have a strong opinion about this glyph - and I guess being Swiss
doesn't help, since we would prefer to put this character into a
parallel universe and then close the space-time rift forever.
As I can't do much about the
To put a SS-ligature at the position which is indented by the Unicode
Consortium to be filled with the letter Capital Sharp S ist wrong. You
could write an opentype rule to substitute ß with SS in capitalised
words but you shoudn’t missuse the place of a different symbole.
The capital Eszett
Bruno talked about the capital ß and said that the Ubuntu Font Family
would probably got for a composite ligature of SS/SZ for the
codepoint, when expansion gets that far.
Speaking to various locals here is Germany, the capital has come about
for titling (places like all-capital street signs)
** Description changed:
- Ubuntu 10.10 dev, ttf-ubuntu-font-family 0.68+ufl-0ubuntu1.
+ The German glyph LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E) is not currently
+ in the 0.68 version of the Ubuntu Font Family. Other free fonts
+ frequently used in open-source contexts like DejaVu or Linux
This falls in the Latin Extended Additional block, and at the moment
the Ubuntu Font Family only has Latin A, and Latin B. I need to check
when it is on the timetable to give you a better answer. When I hear
back, it'll be attached to a milestone and you'll be able to keep track
on it by that
** Changed in: ubuntu-font-family
Milestone: 1.00 = latin-e-a
--
Expansion: 'ẞ' LATIN CAPTIAL LETTER SHARP S (U+1E9E)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/650498
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing
63 matches
Mail list logo
