[Gllug] [OT] Largest mailbox EVER!

[Bernard Peek]

In message <200311200923.hAK9NoRH028159 at isengard.accucard.com>, Tethys 
<tet at createservices.com> writes
>
>Bernard Peek writes:
>
>>It is possible to apply a *limited* range of emphasis using ASCII but
>>HTML offers a wider range of much more effective methods. In the hands
>>of a reasonably competent typesetter those emphases can drastically
>>improve the effectiveness of text as a communications medium.
>
>I challenge you to find me a reasonably competent typesetter[1] in my office
>(apart from my good self, naturally :-) Or indeed, any office. I'd say
>they account for less than a hundredth of a percent of the email sending
>population.

That all depends on what you consider to be competent. The majority of 
people are perfectly capable of using an HTML mailer without doing to 
much damage. They won't gain any advantage from using HTML, but won't do 
any harm either. The problem is the people who know enough to fiddle but 
not enough to do a good job.

There is now a generation of school-leavers who have been taught how to 
use typography. Once they replace us old-timers we won't need to worry.

[...]

>[1] Of course, even a competent typesetter is severely hampered
>    by modern tools. Windows (and hence Word) doesn't even handle
>    ligatures, for fsck's sake.

Word doesn't appear to support ligatures but Windows does.

> I used to work in the newspaper
>    industry, and The Times was at the forefront of typographical
>    goodness. The world's most popular typeface was designed for
>    them, for example. But they replaced their Atex system with a
>    Windows based one (at vast expense), and now they have a shoddy
>    looking product[2]. I've ranted elsewhere about the decline of
>    typographical standards, and Redmond is primarily to blame for
>    much of it.
>
>[2] To the point where they've had to redesign the lower case "f",
>    making it narrower to avoid "fi" sequences looking awful without
>    ligatures. They've done the same to a few other characters for
>    the same reason.

Ligatures are in the font files but my guess is that the users aren't 
being trained to use them. It's simpler to change the font so that 
ligatures aren't necessary. There were always some fonts where ligatures 
weren't required. Most people won't notice the difference anyway.


-- 
Bernard Peek
London, UK. DBA, Manager, Trainer & Author. Will work for money.


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug