acute vs. kreska

From: Martin Kotulla (
Date: Sat Oct 16 1999 - 04:54:04 EDT has a nice rundown on the design of Polish
diacritics. They go to great lengths to point out that the Polish
"kreska" is not identical with the acute accent in many other languages.
The kreska is steeper than the acute accent.

Too bad the Unicode Consortium didn't hear about this ... <g>

Now however I am running into a problem with the following characters:

* U+0106 Cacute
* U+0107 cacute
* U+0144 Nacute
* U+0145 nacute
* U+00D3 Oacute
* U+00F3 oacute
* U+015A Sacute
* U+015B sacute
* U+0179 Zacute
* U+017A zacute

1. Is this just typographical nitpicking or a real issue for Polish
readers? On the one hand, for at least half of the CE fonts in the
FontShop catalog, the kreska looks just like an acute, on the other hand
I remember a young Croat lady working at my company looking at my screen
and noticing that the "accents are too flat".

2. From the above, I assume this is not restricted to Polish but might
be an issue for other CE languages as well. Which?

3. Which of the above characters have to be designed separately with
acute and with kreska? I know that Oacute/oacute is used in many Western
languages, so this is an obvious candidate for separate designs, but
which else? I don't want to robotically create glyphs that are not used
in any known language.

4. Does anybody know websites similar to for
diacritics design in other Central European languages?


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT