Uppercase versus Lowercase diacritics

Michael Jarboe

I'm curious what the opinions are on uppercase versus lowercase diacritics height/size/positioning, and what one thinks is best practice.

I've seen examples of:

1. Either no, or almost no perceptible difference between uppercase/lowercase mark height and positioning
2. Difference in positioning only, uppercase/lowercase marks are equal in height (lowered positioning on caps to decrease overall vertical height of accented glyph)
3. Difference of mark height only (positioning looks more relative to lowercase, but uppercase marks aren't as tall, therefore again, decreasing overall vertical height of accented glyph)
4. Difference in positioning and height of mark (these are most extreme, greatly reducing overall vertical height of accented glyphs)

And then there are examples where the mark isn't necessarily adjusted in height linearly, but the form looks rotated to decrease its vertical reach.

Are these differences and the decisions behind these variations more genre specific overall or more personal preference?

Are the extreme examples more so typical in display faces where all caps setting with tight leading could be desired?

Max Phillips

I think it's vital to make cap diacritics flatter, and have them hug the base forms a bit tighter, or they stick up like luggage on a roof rack and collide with descenders.  Much more importantly, that's what Victor Gaultney thinks, unless I misunderstood his Extended Latin workshop at TypeCon.

Also think you generally have to redraw the acute and grave if you're making them more horizontal.  If the form looks like it's been rotated, someone wasn't taking enough care.

attar

Speaking of which, is it okay to have flattened cap acute for Polish?

Dmitry Goloub

@Adrien Tétar 
I'm not sure, but since the Polish kreska is almost vertical, maybe a shorter one instead of a flattened one would be good for the job?