From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 08:49:11 EST
I've been pondering the very same issue as John, though with a little less
focused attention.
On 11/09/2002 11:57:18 AM jameskass wrote:
>In the case you have offered, since these Fraktur letters are
>used as variables (indicating sourcing in BHS), it shouldn't be
>considered abuse, IMHO.
The use of Fraktur in Greek and Hebrew apparatus is not as variables, which
denote some particular attribute but have no specific value; they are
symbols with specific meaning, more comparable to letters denoting units of
measure. But, the Fraktur-ness is essential in their interpretation.
Options:
1. Use a symbol font / PUA for all apparatus and text-annotation symbols
(e.g. some texts use angle brackets that look like |_ and _| but are
positioned in the lower corners of the em square). Cons: involves PUA
codepoints, and interchange requires prior agreement -- would really need
to seek agreement throughout Biblical studies community.
2. Use regular Latin letters and a Fraktur face. Cons: need multiple fonts
to work with Biblical texts (but may be true regardless), and plain-text
interchange not possible.
3. Use regular Latin letters; provide a single font with Fraktur glyphs as
alternates. Cons: usefulness limited to certain software only, and
plain-text interchange not possible.
4. Use Fraktur math symbols. Cons: I can't think of any, though we'd still
want to promote consensus among the Biblical studies community on using
this.
I think I could readily go along with John's suggestion (i.e. option 4).
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 11 2002 - 09:26:29 EST