Khaled,
On a typewriter, the same effect can be achieved as
"anathemati<half-interval up>s<BS><1 interval down>z<half-interval up>e"
Where would the line between markup and typesetting languages be drawn?
Leo
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledhosny_at_eglug.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 05:51:09PM -0700, Leo Broukhis wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Attached is a part of page 36 of Henry Alford's *The Queen's English: a
> > manual of idiom and usage (1888)* [
> > http://archive.org/details/queensenglishman00alfo]
> >
> > Is the way to indicate alternative s/z spellings used there plain text
> > (arguably, if it can be done with a typewriter, it is plain text)
>
> I see a typeset book not an output of a typewriter.
>
> > or rich text (ignoring the font size of letters s and z)?
> >
> > If it's the latter, what's the markup to achieve it?
>
> Using TeX:
>
> \def\s{${}^{\rm s}_{\rm z}$}
>
> 49. How are we to decide between {\it s} and {\it z} in such words as
> anathemati\s{}e, cauteri\s{}e, criti\-ci\s{}e, deodori\s{}e,
> dogmati\s{}e,
> fraterni\s{}e, and the rest? Many of these are derived from Greek
> \bye
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
>
Received on Tue Oct 01 2013 - 12:21:01 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 01 2013 - 12:21:01 CDT