Re: Florin revisited

From: Joerg Knappen (KNAPPEN@alpha.ntp.springer.de)
Date: Tue Dec 07 1999 - 08:25:04 EST


Chris Flynn schrieb:

> Publishers specializing in technical books on photography (e.g. Focal Press,
> Kodak)
> and lens manufacturers *do* use the florin sign for lens apertures. Perhaps
> this is
> incorrect, but it does seem to have become the de-facto standard.

Note that there is a difference between _text italic_ and $math italic$,
affecting not only the width and spacing of the letters but also their
form. The most famous example is the letter _v_ which is nu-shaped in
many text italic faces, but must be upsilon-shaped in math italic. The
same is true of the $f$: conventional expectation of the reader is, that
a math italic f is florin-shaped (or has a descender at least). However,
unlike the case of $v$ vs. $\nu$, there is not the danger of misinterpreting
the symbol if the descender is lacking.

--J"org Knappen

> The florin
> sign
> ($) is easily distinguishable from an italic f in most typefaces used in
> modern books
> since the italic f usually lacks a tail. The "florin sign" is also slanted
> whether or not
> it is set as italic.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT