Re: Glyph Stance

From: saqqara (
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 13:22:14 CDT

  • Next message: D. Starner: "Re: New Public Review Issue posted"

    Re: Glyph StanceFrom Mike Ayers: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:34 AM
    > Nevertheless there is a case (however strong or weak) for
    > Unicode admitting
    > mirroring and simple rotation transformations. The phenomenon not only
    > occurs in some ancient scripts but also in modern Latin
    > usage, most notably
    > in advertising.

     which case it is being deliberately written incorrectly in order t get attention. Advertising is not plain text - not even remotely.


    I am not advocating the introduction of such modfiers, simply that a case can be made. When and if someone makes such a proposal, with adequate presentation of evidence, I'll judge on its merits. Harshly I expect, I heartily dislike the notion of control or modfier codes unless proven absolutely unavoidable.

    In the case of Toys <mirror>R</mirror> Us, stating the R is incorrect is a value judgement..

    You cannot presume as fact these constructions are 'to get attention', they may be to produce a more pleasing symmetry or communicate meaning, just as the Egyptians had a different notion of writing than is supported by our more functional alphabetic scripts. Although my gut feeling agrees with yours on plain text implications for Latin script, I haven't studied the subject in depth so I may well be wrong.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 26 2004 - 13:18:52 CDT