Re: Dotless J with stroke.

Am 20.11.2007 um 22:14 schrieb John Hudson:

> Russ Stygall wrote:
>
>> U+025F (LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS J WITH STROKE) is incorrectly 
>> described as "typographically a turned f ", since the stroke/bar of 
>> 'f' is at 'x-height', which when turned would have the stroke/bar on 
>> the 'baseline'. 'Dotless J with stroke', as illustrated in Unicode 
>> 5.1, is at half 'x-height'!
>
> I have other questions about the design of this letter. Should it, in 
> fact, be a j with a bar (the bar at the half-x-height as in the barred 
> i)? Or should it be a turned f with the bar repositioned? Depending on 
> the design of the typeface, it is not unusual for the descender 
> terminal of the j to be very different from the ascending terminal of 
> the f, so this character could look very different depending on the 
> answer to this question (see attached).
>
> Of course, the dotless barred j form shown in the graphic is also 
> going to be necessary as a glyph variant for soft-dotted U+0249
>
> John Hudson

I agree with Russ and John. I suggest glyphs as shown here:
http://www.signographie.de/cms/upload/pdf/f_j_i_s.pdf
and, possibly, a correction of the obviously incorrect explanation text 
lines.

A:S






________________________________________________________

Andreas Stötzner  Signographie
[email protected]    Tel. +49-34296-74849    Fax +49-34296-74815
Willkommen auf www.signographie.de