- 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 03:34:46 UTC