Re: A sign/abbreviation for "magister"

From: Asmus Freytag via Unicode <>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:35:19 -0700
On 10/31/2018 11:10 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
which, if my understanding of "convient" is correct, carefully does
[not] quite say that it is *wrong* not to superscript, but that one should
superscript when one can because that is the convention in typography.
Draft style may differ from mail style, and this, from typography, only 
due to the limitations imposed by input interfaces. These limitations are 
artificial and mainly the consequence of insufficient development of said 
interfaces. If the computer is anything good for, then that should also 
include the transition from typewriter fallbacks to the true digital 
representation of all natural languages. Latin not excluded.

It is a fallacy that all text output on a computer should match the convention of "fine typography".

Much that is written on computers represents an (unedited) first draft. Giving such texts the appearance of texts, which in the day of hot metal typography, was reserved for texts that were fully edited and in many cases intended for posterity is doing a disservice to the reader.

On the other hand, I'm a firm believer in applying certain styling attributes to things like e-mail or discussion papers. Well-placed emphasis can make such texts more readable (without requiring that they pay attention to all other facets of "fine typography".)


Received on Wed Oct 31 2018 - 13:35:31 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Oct 31 2018 - 13:35:31 CDT