- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 05:34:10 +0200
- To: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
- Cc: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>, public-i18n-core@w3.org, indic <public-i18n-indic@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
John Hudson, Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:13:09 -0700: > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > >> If we include history when we evaluate scripts, then it is even >> questionable whether Latin and Greek are bicameral scripts since >> there are no "bicameralism" in e.g. the Greek sources for the Bible. > > Again I come back to my previous point: if what the spec is trying to > address is line-breaking and justification behaviour, coming at it > from nominal script categorisation seems like a basic confusion of > categories. We can get hung up on all sorts of concepts within > grammatology, when really we don't need to if we instead start by > defining line-breaking and justification behaviour types, and then > look at how these map to individual scripts (with appropriate caveats > or exceptions re. language, locale, style). That makes much more > sense to me than starting by trying to categorise scripts according > to unclear and non-discrete criteria and then trying to map these to > line-breaking and justification behaviours. Start with the function. It is a valid point. Btw a (modern) area where letter-spacing for justification is not recommended (at least it is often difficult and ugly) is inside media (such as interactive/social media) where *{font-family:monospaced;} is typically the default. E.g. e-mail and (old) type writers. I don't know enough about the block scripts, but monospace is a kind of block style, it seems ... Also, if justification is enabled while you are typing, then the text would "dance" a lot during editing. Which would be impractical. I don't know fractur scripts very well, but I don't think it has/had much bold and italics etc - which is something it has in common with many (old) monospace fonts and even - to a certain degree - with "screen fonts", such as Chicago and Lucida Grande. Another thing that fractur and monospace has in common - if we think about how monospace is used in text editors, is lots of use of colors. (E.g. Vim uses colors instead of font size etc, in order to signal that <h1>is a heading</h1>.) Well, may be this last point is stretching it a bit, but I have on my mind an old Norwegian almanac which used a bit of fracture, with red colour for holy days and sundays etc. We can also consider liturgical books/religious service book - they too use lots of "color coding" and little of cursive and bold and little of justification etc. So, simply put, when the font/script - doesn't provide/permit the normal 2 weights and the normal 2 styles or when something other than lack of normal weights/styles causes the letters to become overloaded with detailed extra semantics, then authors/rendering tools have to cut down on what e.g. letter-spacing can be used for. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 03:41:14 UTC