W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Placement of accents on italic fonts

From: Alexander Savenkov <w3@hotbox.ru>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:08:03 +0300
Message-ID: <1392530557.20030120010803@hotbox.ru>
To: www-font@w3.org, Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>

Hello everyone,

(quite a delayed response actually)

2002-09-25T10:48:06Z Martin Duerst wrote:

> Dear font experts,
I'm an expert by no means, but I took a couple of Russian books to see
what's happening there.

...Snip...

> Example:

>     ^         ^      ^      ^
>     |        /       /       /
>     |       /       /       /
>     |      /       /       /

>     a)     b)      c)      d)


> a) the original, upright, glyph with circumflex accent

> b) italic/slanted glyph where the circumflex moves according
>     to the geometric transform

> c) italic glyph where the circumflex moves, but not as much

> d) itacic glyph where the accent is just placed straight over
>     the center of the base letter.

> Expressed in these examples, my question is: For well-designed
> fonts, is c) (rather than b) or d)) a good approximation?
According to what I see the diacritics are italicized according to b)
(at least in Russian), but it's poorly implemented across the
browsers. Circumflex is not used in Russian, but combining stress
signs are always italicized like in b).

Alex.
---
  Alexander "Croll" Savenkov                  http://www.thecroll.com/
  w3@hotbox.ru                                     http://croll.da.ru/
Received on Sunday, 19 January 2003 17:14:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 11 June 2011 00:14:01 GMT