From: Philippe Verdy (email@example.com)
Date: Wed May 09 2007 - 23:52:43 CDT
> Envoyé : jeudi 10 mai 2007 00:56
> À : firstname.lastname@example.org
> Objet : Re: The glyph of the CAPITAL SHARP S
> At 00:35 +0200 2007-05-10, Karl Pentzlin wrote:
> >ME> I put a PDF up with additional examples. See
> >ME> http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/capital-sharp-s.pdf
> >As a native speaker of German, I tend to read the 2d/3d glyph as IS:
> >MAISSTAB = corn stick ??. Personally, I like 2f/3f and 2a/3a most (in
> >that order). 2b/3b and 2c/3c appear to me as a little too much "small
> >long s + small s"-like. 2c/3c look a little "blown up" at their lower
> >half, 2e/3e the same at their upper half.
> I tend to think that 2a-d look wrong next to capital S, though 2e and
> 2f seem to get away with the teardrop terminal.
> I guess the best candidates are 2f, 3a, and 3f.
2F and 3F are very similar, I tend to think that the bottom serif on the
right part of serie 3 is a pollution (in the center of the character, when
other letters have external serifs), so 2F (with a simple bowl) is more
logical than 3F.
The font style you chose is one that is to be typesetted in small sizes
(like newspapers), and should survive the "scanner test" and OCR.
The suggestion 3A is nearly making a small s, and does not fit well within
capitals. (2A has the same problem)
I really prefer your 2B suggestion, because the slight narrowing of the S
helps making the distinction from the regular capital S.
I'd say that 3F, the one that remains more closely ressembles the lowercase
sharp s, without avoiding the confusion with a capital B
So solution 2B is a good compromise...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 09 2007 - 23:54:07 CDT