Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Deleted Account


Deleted Account
Last Active
Member, Type Person
Invited by
Admin James Puckett
  • Re: OpenType feature to transform (c) to ©

    A. You two are not suggesting Anything, go on with no suggestion, as if the “smartest’ thing to nothing.

    B. I am suggesting nowhere that a character that is on the keyboard, like “a” would be input that way. Don’t be silly,  if I need to type an a, I type an a. And I’m certainly not suggesting that the Russian word for © is equivalent to the Unicode name of the glyph. 

    Again, a rabble of nerd-facing suggestions of nothing makes more sense to you, then why not say nothing. Your ‘smartest’ solution is for users to hunt for input of unrelated glyphs, what we have been forced to do for years. 

    Via voice input I am going to say © to my computer (I spoke the words “copyright“ and “sign”, boys, the glyph I sought appeared). I didn’t do it with OT, my os did it with the same result. That is compatible with human activities on the Mac, in English.

    It makes no sense, is not acceptable, not proper nor adequate, but it just happened,  again, © © © © © © © ©, and I didn’t have to lift a finger. Jealous?
  • Re: OpenType feature to transform (c) to ©

    "Is this the smartest way with no problems? "

    I'll actually try to answer your question. It's called a "copyright sign", and anything else is inaccurate and unhelpful. So, obviously, (c), (C) and Copyright have issues with the user wanting to input those very things and not ©.

    The smartest way with no problems is vague, but a smart way is sub copyright sign by ©, a "rebus" where the underlying text matches the name of U+00A9. And, because sub copyright sign by © is a contextual alternate, that is the feature it would be smartest to use.

    Accidents associated with the intended input of "copyright sign" and not © are of course possible, but if one is smart, when thinking of use-facing issues, one ignores the problems of communicating with type designers, which is about the only time that accident should happen.;)

  • Re: Naming the Widest Width

    Isn’t this 125th anniversary of the day they decided to stop naming font sizes and started giving them numbers?

    Happy birthday size numbers!;)
  • Re: Dutch IJ with dots

    “Do people in cursive handwriting also have an issue with cursive connections in these same scenarios?”

    ...that’s what I’d like to know too. Reading, writing, speaking, and hearing are the informants, typography is a disformant overlay.
  • Re: TYPO Labs 2018 Berlin, April 12–14

    Not sure what Arabic’s need for a registered xtra axis has to do with Typolab’s curation of presentations? Arabic does not need to give a presentation to say it needs this, or an axis of identical functionality, to be registered.