[85822] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Klingon orthography
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Tue Jun 23 18:30:46 2009
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:47:16 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
In-reply-to: <f1d476f10906231351m490add97j49f8637190b53f8c@mail.gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>wrote:
>> The third shortcoming is aesthetic. Because it eschews casing in
>> general, Klingon text cannot take advantage of ordinary typographic
>> conventions, which, in fairness, make any text easier to read.
>
> Feh. I can't agree that having variant forms for the same letter does
> anything to ease the job of the reader. I would argue the opposite: having
> the same shape for a word wherever it appears makes the text easier to read.
> If there is no difference between A and a, why require both of them in the
> same typeface?
Michael, being a typographer, understands well the purpose of lower-case
letters. They provide a break for the eye, and really do make text
easier to read. (I still yearn for better support for text figures on
the Web.) They're not some pointless, arbitrary form that someone came
up with one day.
--
SuStel
Stardate 9478.1
tlhIngan Hol MUSH: http://trimboli.name/mush
