I agree with you; on the one hand, the examples mentioned like få
and fè and so on don't look very nice as is and could use a little
correction; but they would benefit more from adding a pixel or so of
I was thinking more about high resolution (where pixels are so small
you nearly cannot see
Kent Karlsson scripsit:
They should NOT be tweaked apart by kerning. That would destroy the normal
spacing of glyphs within words. Adding or removing an accent should
NOT change the spacing between letters.
I don't see how that's possible in the general case. In particular, ï
just about
I don't see how that's possible in the general case. In particular, ï
just about has to be wider than i (except in a monowidth font, obviously),
or the dots will collide with whatever's nearby. Similarly with i-macron.
A diaeresis or macron over i or j can be narrower than when over most
Doug Ewell wrote:
I suspect it would end when you start talking about combinations like qj
and f that are unlikely to appear in natural language text. At least
gj exists in Hungarian.
fb, fh and fk are very common in Dutch (much more so than fj). f exists in
Icelandic; at least I've found
Doug Ewell wrote:
I suspect it would end when you start talking about combinations like qj
and fþ that are unlikely to appear in natural language text.
You should know better than to make rash statements like this on the Unicode
list !
I don't know about qj, but fþ is a not uncommon
Pim Blokland wrote as follows, responding to Doug Ewell.
quote
I suspect it would end when you start talking about combinations like qj
and f that are unlikely to appear in natural language text. At least
gj exists in Hungarian.
fb, fh and fk are very common in Dutch (much more so than fj).
Yes, and qj. And similarly, f has overlappings with several more
letters, so you would need ligatures for fb, fh, fk, f etc. But then
where would it end?
I suspect it would end when you start talking about
combinations like qj
and f that are unlikely to appear in natural language
Kent Karlsson schreef:
occurrences of fé, fä, få, and fö, where the f may
in some(!) fonts overlap with the (apparent!) diacritic.
Of course. Similar problems exist in other languages: German has fä,
fö, fü; Dutch has fà, fè, fì, fò etc. Time to update those ligature
tables!
I haven't been
Andrew C. West andrewcwest at alumni dot princeton dot edu wrote:
I suspect it would end when you start talking about combinations like
qj and f that are unlikely to appear in natural language text.
You should know better than to make rash statements like this on the
Unicode list !
I don't
At 05:51 AM 3/10/2003, Pim Blokland wrote:
Of course. Similar problems exist in other languages: German has fä,
fö, fü; Dutch has fà, fè, fì, fò etc. Time to update those ligature
tables!
It is not normal, in text typography, to ligate the f to accent marks (I
have seen the f ligated to the left
I mean, the dot is an
accent mark, allowing the i to be decomposed into U+0131 and U+0307.
Not canonically. Anyway, the dot isn't an accent mark -- it has no effect
on pronunciation. [Skip lecture on origins of the dot...]
Rick
John Hudson schreef:
Collision of any letter with an accent mark on a preceding
or following letter is simply a mistake, and should be corrected
by letterspacing (positive kerning).
I agree with you; on the one hand, the examples mentioned like få
and fè and so on don't look very nice as is
At 11:53 AM 3/10/2003, Pim Blokland wrote:
I agree with you; on the one hand, the examples mentioned like få
and fè and so on don't look very nice as is and could use a little
correction; but they would benefit more from adding a pixel or so of
extra space than from merging the fs and the accent
Kent Karlsson schreef:
I would appreciate if more fonts had an fj ligature, and
(e.g.) a gj ligature too (in some fonts gj otherwise have
overlapping glyphs).
Yes, and qj. And similarly, f has overlappings with several more letters, so
you would need ligatures for fb, fh, fk, fþ etc. But then
Pim Blokland pblokland at planet dot nl wrote:
I would appreciate if more fonts had an fj ligature, and
(e.g.) a gj ligature too (in some fonts gj otherwise have
overlapping glyphs).
Yes, and qj. And similarly, f has overlappings with several more
letters, so you would need ligatures for
At 02:40 PM 3/9/2003, Pim Blokland wrote:
And similarly, f has overlappings with several more letters, so
you would need ligatures for fb, fh, fk, fþ etc. But then where would it
end?
It ends where the font developer wants it to end, hopefully informed by
some linguistic likelihood. In my case,
16 matches
Mail list logo
