From: Peter Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jan 30 2004 - 14:52:09 EST
On 30/01/2004 09:44, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
>... The latter would be easier
>to implement, but then would lead to arguments among the
>perfectionists as to why "small capital" should be a secondary
>weight distinction when capital versus small is a tertiary
>weight distinction. And so on and so on...
Thank you, Ken. Well, this perfectionist is arguing why this should be a
PRIMARY weight distinction when capital versus small is tertiary,...
>In any case, these small capitals are very, very unlikely to
>count much in sorting of any real corpus of data, and even if
>they do, the mechanism of tailoring is always available for
>people to tweak the table into exactly the behavior they
... but I agree that it is of no practical significance.
-- Peter Kirk email@example.com (personal) firstname.lastname@example.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 30 2004 - 15:45:35 EST