From: Asmus Freytag (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Nov 06 2008 - 15:24:28 CST
On 11/6/2008 12:45 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
> On 6 Nov 2008, at 19:56, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>> Wouldn't you (and others) think that the reason that such side by
>> side placement is common has to do with the restrictions on vertical
>> space on the line? I think, rather than being a feature of the
>> *notational system* it's a reflection of typographical constraint.
>> Can you (or others) corroborate or refute this?
> Teuthonista is just as complex and highly-developed as the Uralic
> Phonetic Alphabet is. While UPA stacks diacritics, Teuthonista places
> some of them side by side. Actually so does UPA. And we encoded the
> side-by-side ones explicitly.
>> If this is indeed primarily motivated by typographic constraint, then
>> it would not be useful to invent a new mechanism to encode a
>> rendering issue. Instead, the explanation about permissible
>> typographic variation in rendering stacked accents ought to be
>> expanded/clarified, including and explanation of when and how common
>> such variations are employed.
> Teuthonista stacks as well though.
This is a confusing answer, since you give so little context/examples.
I claim that side by side is common for tall narrow accents, but
uncommon for flat wide ones. Is that the difference?
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 06 2008 - 15:27:13 CST