I'm curious about the design of the dagger symbol. After looking up its history, it seems to originate from a more abstract form (relatively similar to the division symbol?) than the more cross-like modern versions. Its origins look more so like full-size symbols (reaches from a descending point all the way to cap height), as opposed to superscript-like.
Does anyone know when the smaller, more superscript style dagger symbols came into prominence? Is that more so a contemporary thing where designers liken it to the size, and scale of the asterisk? Is there a preference among typographers for which they prefer when setting text or display?
Whether or not it could be said that either version is more or less correct, I recall over years of seeing the symbol in print that it is, and should be more superscipt-like, yet I seem to see more typefaces where the design is full size.
0
Comments
*I've seen a low asterix a couple of times, but it's really rare -- generally when used as a multiplication sign. This is probably related.
†This of course deserves a footnote.
Yes, I'm trying to decide on what rationale to adopt moving forward, and this thought makes me think that I should lean towards the more superscript-like dagger amongst text face designs, and the full-size amongst display.
Another possibility is to set the superscript as a stylistic alternative, since anybody who would appreciate it already knows something about typography, and hence probably knows something about using OpenType. That way, you can get both the novices and the experts to appreciate your efforts.
If you do decide to make a superscripted form the default, you may still wish to offer a full-size alternate.
(However, slightly different versions, either in size or position or both, to harmonize with oldstyle vs lining figures are not uncommon.)
The registered symbol, on the other hand, always follows the name that it marks as registered. It is comparable to the trademark symbol (™), and legal standards dictate which of the two is to be used in a given situation. It is common for both of these marks to be treated as a superscript so that the mark is less obtrusive and does not interfere with the reading of the product name itself.
Customers probably never complain about a full-size ® in a font either because they just scale-and-shift it (who cares?) or they just run it full size, since it often appears in legalistic mouse type (again, who cares?)
Although the copyright and registered appear to be alike and both pertain to marking intellectual property, the fact is that their current usage is distinctly different in practice and, in my opinion, they demand different design approaches.
In any case, I made some full-sized stylistic alternates for the dagger and double dagger in Cormorant.
I've never thought about different versions of the copyright symbol for oldstyle vs lining. I thought including currency, degree, math symbols etc. was enough.
I guess anything that aligns at lining/cap height could use a modified (size, scale, positioning) version for oldstyle figures, and vice versa.
When I made the Nyala Latin design, I wasn't really expecting it to be used, and it was mostly included in the font for technical compatibility reasons (to provide support for at least one Windows 8-bit codepage, the lack of which could cause problems at the time). So I felt a certain liberty with regard to the design of some punctuation and symbol characters. As it turns out, I see Nyala Latin used with some frequency, presumably by people who don't realise that it's primarily an Ethiopic font.
@Christian Thalmann that's a nice alternate rapier!)
[With acknowledgements to Tom Milo, who first pointed this out to me.]