From: John Hudson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri May 04 2007 - 12:52:01 CST
Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Well, the person who has signed this proposal works for the German
> Home Office. I'll try to ask them why they wish to spend billions
> for the software upgrades required for this obscure dupe of "ß".
What software upgrades? What would be required?
It seems to me that the proposal really implies little more than the optional provision of
support for this character in some fonts, so that people who want to use it can. I am
actually more concerned about the probable lack of software upgrades, which will result in
a major hassle for users. Consider: user A creates a document in which he uses the new
uppercase eszett character in place of SS because he happens to like it and maybe
subscribes to the same (failed) orthographic reform ideals that inspired its creation.
User A then sends this document to user B, or maybe he even posts it as live text on his
website where user B goes to look at it. User B doesn't like the uppercase eszett and
would much rather read SS in those places and, most frustratingly, doesn't have any fonts
on his system that support the new character anyway, so gets a .notdef box everywhere the
Now, wouldn't it be a better experience for everyone involved if the display of the
uppercase eszett were handled at the glyph level, instead of at the character level?
Depending on font selection and/or user control of layout features, the same text could be
displayed using the uppercase eszett or the letter sequence SS, while a plain text
distinction could be made in any document without breaking display in fonts that do not
support the uppercase eszett.
-- Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com Gulf Islands, BC email@example.com We say our understanding measures how things are, and likewise our perception, since that is how we find our way around, but in fact these do not measure. They are measured. -- Aristotle, Metaphysics
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 04 2007 - 12:53:17 CST