Once again about the word 'typo': surprisingly, my mobile dictionary (Advanced English Dictionary on Windows Phone 8.1) lists 'typo' as 'a mistake in printing resulting from mechanical failure of some kind'. Following this lead I found out that 'typo' is derived directly from 'typographical error' and some dictionaries treat it as a synonym of the original phrase, which in turn means (according to Wiktionary) 1. a mistake made while typing (caused by a slip of the fingers)—what clicked in Simon's head, the typical meaning associated with the contraction 'typo', 2. a mistake made during the process of typesetting—I think quote misuse and the likes qualify? So the original post was, if somewhat misleading, not very far from truth.
I even dare say some Poles can't tell the difference between a regular kreska and one slanted the opposite direction, like the grave accent. Especially in handwriting. Okay, maybe that sounded too blaming. As a matter of fact, since Polish doesn't use any grave accents, the direction doesn't really matter. So in handwriting, any stroke, vertical, diagonal - left or right, horizontal, makes for a legible kreska. It's not uncommon to see right slanted kreskas in rapid writing. It remains a fact that in print a more inclined kreska... Grzegorz Rolek said:
somehow feels spot on.
@Nick Shinn I don't feel qualified to answer that, but I recall seeing that kreska crossing the base letter many times. You might call it a traditional kludge, as it would often be used whenever the space is insufficient, possibly beside a strikethrough Ż (Z dot). I'm not quite sure however whether it's much of a cultivated tradition — such design brings to my mind old printing. Especially that ogoneks were also once (like in 1700s) straight strokes crossing the base letters.
I've never seen a typeface featuring the kreska. (Not to say that I've seen much of anything). I think it's kind of not a big deal, especially with fonts that include acutes that are not too horizontal. And even if so, not only a random Polish person, but sadly, the majority of our designers, probably wouldn't tell the difference. Bluntly saying. The real problem is companies like MS selling their products with incomplete fonts - 90% of the fonts included with the Office lacks even basic diacritics, I guess that MS just already was a licensee of the basic versions of the fonts but not the extended ones...