Re: The glyph of the CAPITAL SHARP S

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Wed May 09 2007 - 20:36:45 CDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Religous symbols (Re: Uppercase ▀ ...)"

    On 5/9/2007 6:04 PM, Adam Twardoch wrote:
    > Asmus Freytag wrote:
    >> I buy that the minute the upper case forms of 'o', 'c' and (regular)
    >> 's' are rendered with 'edges'. ;-)
    > Well, no. But they all are simple shapes that are usually drawn with
    > one penstroke.
    So? I draw my ├č with a single penstroke, too. I don't know how you do it.
    >> Frankly, looking at the examples, your suggested shape is very clear,
    >> but it's not self-evident (I would not have recognized it, except
    >> after having endured the debate on this issue with dozens of
    >> examples). After 50 years of common use, who knows, but right now, it
    >> works better if the shape contains hints of its lower case origin.
    > Andreas St├Âtzner's "Graphokombinatorik" includes my proposed shape as
    > valid:
    > (variant A1-B2-C1)
    Well, sure. But what I'm giving you is 'user feedback', not theoretical
    consideration based on typpographical arcana. In an environment where
    readers *expect* a capital sharp-s, your shape may well work, or may
    work well, even. In the current environment, where ordinary users
    clearly don't expect to see that shape, the shape needs to help them by
    echoing the more familiar lowercase form.


    PS: I see typographical 'rules' as most helpful where they
    embody/summarize hard-won experience in what is readable and what
    harmonizes. Your suggested shape does harmonize, but it's not
    (currently) a very readable design.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 09 2007 - 20:38:48 CDT