From: David Starner (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jan 10 2006 - 18:31:10 CST
On 1/10/06, Kent Karlsson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I think it is the AUTHOR of the text that should decide on all spelling
> That includes diaeresis vs. e above, U vs. V and many many other cases
> numerous spelling reforms for numerous languages).
The _author_ of the text has never had the last say on spellings.
Their editors and typesetters controlled that, and later editors and
typesetters have changed it willy-nilly.
It's also not clearly true that diaeresis above versus e above is a
spelling change. If I design a fancy script font that turns the
diaeresis into a wavy line, that doesn't mean that it should be
encoded as a tilde. If the users accept e above as a glyph variant of
diaeresis, then it is. If the text is correct when viewed as modern
German with a script variant but not as historical German with an e
above, it's obvious it was intended as a glyph variant.
Likewise, I see no reason to stress out over which level
orthographical changes is made at. If the users of the text want to
use an e above instead of diaeresis, then I don't see why we should
stress out. It's easy, and if it's just decrotive, it doesn't cause
any problems. Likewise, printing a ordinary text with the long-s or
old-style u/v should be possible with OpenType, and as long as it's
just that, there should be no real problem. In fact, using such a font
in a PDF file (if possible?) could make searching and copying for
ordinary use feasible while displaying an idealized form of the
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 10 2006 - 18:32:32 CST