From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Sat May 14 2005 - 14:20:16 CDT
On 14/05/2005 18:29, Hans Aberg wrote:
> At 17:44 +0100 2005/05/14, Peter Kirk wrote:
>> On 14/05/2005 00:19, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>>> That was the first time I saw the term "guillemet" in English. Could
>>> I have incorrectly learned the term "guillemot" from unreliable
>>> sources, or from other "standards"? May be it was in glyph names for
>>> Postscript Level 1 fonts? I can't remember.
>> Quite possibly you copied the error from others. Actually Andrey and
>> Hans both used the incorrect form before you did in this thread, so I
>> am not blaming you.
> The error arouse from the original poster, the others copying it over.
> The blame arouse with the blamer. :-)
Well, Hans, I could have pointed out that Andrey correctly quoted the
Postscript names "guillemotleft" and "guillemotright" (and whoever
decided on that standard had the right to use the name of a bird rather
than the name usually used by typographers), and you were I think the
first to use the word "guillemot" as a standalone word. But I don't
blame anyone for a typo, I just want to put the record straight.
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.10 - Release Date: 13/05/2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 14 2005 - 14:20:53 CDT