Re: [css-fonts] Chinese font Kai count as cursive

I just figure out what Sosho and Gyosho stands for. In Chinese: ¯ó®Ñ and ¦æ®Ñ.

Yes, by this definition, they are more suitable to be called "cursive". And I just saw some propositional font sample fit the definition. (The foundry want to let them behave like Zapfino)

I think there is some discussion about italic in Japanese. That should not be oblique but use the font style called Songcho¡]§º´ÂÅé¡^, in Chinese we called that font style Fangsong¡]¥é§º¡^. But with this definition, italic should be Kai and Kaisho. Because they are hand writing.

Songcho and Fangsong keep more hand-writing detail but they are still print font.

I'm thinking about: if we define font like this, we should be able to assign different font-style with different font in @font-face, right?

WANDERER Bobby Tung
Sent from my iPhone 5.
> Stewart Baker <bakersc@mail.wou.edu> ©ó 2013/11/15 ¤U¤È11:07 ¼g¹D¡G
> 
> Cursive, according to the OED, means "written with a running hand," i.e. without lifting the writing implement between strokes.
> 
> "Written with a running hand, so that the characters are rapidly formed without raising the pen, and in consequence have their angles rounded, and separate strokes joined, and at length become slanted."
> 
> Like John, I'm not sure matters of a single line definition of the word "cursive" are of earth-shattering import.  However, it is the case that cursive is (technically) more a matter of style than formality, so changing to "flowing" or something similar might make sense.  ¡]Although not italic, as they aren't really synonyms.  Cursive is often italic, but italic is not always cursive.  Since there is already an italic in HTML, it might be best to drop any comparison to that.)
> 
> From a clarity stand-point, "informal script style" might mean a number of things, and is rather vague, while "flowing" would refer to one specific characteristic--if that is indeed the characteristic it should refer to.  (The grammar nerd in me also would like to suggest "less formal" in place of "more informal," if that stays in. ;) )
> 
> Gyosho in my dictionary is "running script," while Kaisho is ¡¨square style of handwriting."  My dictionary also does say that Sosho is "cursive script; flowing writing style."  Here's a useful illustration of them all next to one another: http://su-gi-ta.jp/catalog/07/ohakanomojiA!.jpg
> 
> Gyosho does seem to be the happy medium.¡@¡@Kaisho (far right) seems a bit too blocky for cursive.
> 
> Stewart
> 
>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2013/11/15 Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>:
>> >>>   4. Add these examples to definition of 'cursive', same as for
>> >>>      'serif' and 'sans-serif': Kaisho (Japanese), Kai (Chinese).
>> >>
>> >>Kaisho for Japanese is not really correct.  That's a more formal,
>> >>calligraphic style. As the existing example illustrates, Gyoshotai is
>> >>more appropriate.  As for Kai, I defer to the opinion of others.
>> >
>> > I'm good with either Kaisho or Gyosho, or both. Both "looks more like
>> > handwritten pen or brush writing than printed letterwork", but John is
>> > right that Gyosho is more cursive than Kaisho is.
>> >
>> > Sosho is the translation of "cursive" according to my dictionary, but it
>> > may be too cursive. I'm fine to list all these three, or one/two of them.
>> 
>> Then your dictionary is wrong. I don¡¦t always agree with Bringhurst,
>> but in this case I completely agree with Bringhurst¡¦s definition:
>> 
>> Cursive: Flowing. Often used as a synonym for italic.
>> 
>> Cursive means flowing, and italics are (or at least started as)
>> basically partially rationalized calligraphy, so they are cursive,
>> even though not all cursive type is calligraphic.
>> 
>> In the case of Kai, the Chinese Kai style is more rationalized and
>> closer to a true italic; the Japanese Kai style is closer to a
>> calligraphic style. But in both cases the type is cursive.
>> 
>> --
>> cheers,
>> -ambrose <http://gniw.ca>
> 
> 
>