I'm at times amused at the terms we use from day to day to describe type. In 
particular I am somewhat boggled that most people use the  terms "upper case" 
and "lower case", terms derived from the position of boxes of slugs at a 
printshop,  instead of the much more elegant, at least to me, "majuscule" and 
"minuscule" which directly refer to the characteristics of the letters 
themselves. Unfortunately, if I use majuscule and miniscule in conversations 
most people have no idea what I am talking about. 

-- 
James Leo Ryan ..... Austin, Texas ..... taliesinsoft@mac.com

> I'm at times amused at the terms we use from day to day to describe type. In
> particular I am somewhat boggled that most people use the  terms "upper case"
> and "lower case", terms derived from the position of boxes of slugs at a
> printshop,  instead of the much more elegant, at least to me, "majuscule" and
> "minuscule" which directly refer to the characteristics of the letters
> themselves. Unfortunately, if I use majuscule and miniscule in conversations
> most people have no idea what I am talking about.


In typography there seem not to be terminology everyone agrees. Especially typeface classification has dozens of sysyems but none of them can do the job well.

I like uppercase and lowercase terms just because they include piece of printing tradition. And there is more, the term leading for (increasing) line spacing comes from adding lead strips between the lines.

In my mind majuscule and minuscule refer to written forms like for example carolingian minuscule.

I always talk about typefaces describing character shapes or the design. Font is in fact a container for typeface, a computer file or two cases fill of lead. Some people for example talk a about big fonts meaning big type size and I often reply by asking " A big font, how many megabytes is it?"

Jukka

On Apr 13, 3:32=A0am, Armadillo <re...@newsgroup.pls> wrote:
> > I'm at times amused at the terms we use from day to day to describe type=
.. In
> > particular I am somewhat boggled that most people use the =A0terms "uppe=
r case"
> > and "lower case", terms derived from the position of boxes of slugs at a=

> > printshop, =A0instead of the much more elegant, at least to me, "majuscu=
le" and
> > "minuscule" which directly refer to the characteristics of the letters
> > themselves. Unfortunately, if I use majuscule and miniscule in conversat=
ions
> > most people have no idea what I am talking about.
>
> In typography there seem not to be terminology everyone agrees. Especially=
 typeface classification has dozens of sysyems but none of them can do the j=
ob well.
>
> I like uppercase and lowercase terms just because they include piece of pr=
inting tradition. And there is more, the term leading for (increasing) line =
spacing comes from adding lead strips between the lines.
>
> In my mind majuscule and minuscule refer to written forms like for example=
 carolingian minuscule.
>
> I always talk about typefaces describing character shapes or the design. F=
ont is in fact a container for typeface, a computer file or two cases fill o=
f lead. Some people for example talk a about big fonts meaning big type size=
 and I often reply by asking " A big font, how many megabytes is it?"
>
> Jukka

----------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------------------------------------

<< two cases fill of lead. Some people for example talk a about big
fonts meaning big type size and I often reply by asking " A big font,
how many megabytes is it?" >>

=2E..and there are still some that will ask, "How much does it weigh?"
or "How many 'A's in the font?"


Bill

Bill wrote:
> On Apr 13, 3:32 am, Armadillo <re...@newsgroup.pls> wrote:
> << two cases fill of lead. Some people for example talk a about big
> fonts meaning big type size and I often reply by asking " A big font,
> how many megabytes is it?" >>
> 
> ...and there are still some that will ask, "How much does it weigh?"
> or "How many 'A's in the font?"

three, surely? if it's a "big" font, wouldn't you expect one Latin, one 
Greek and one Cyrillic?

or do you count accented characters separately?   . . .   /phil

On Apr 13, 11:16=A0am, phil chastney
<phil.hates.s...@amadeus.munged.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> > On Apr 13, 3:32 am, Armadillo <re...@newsgroup.pls> wrote:
> > << two cases fill of lead. Some people for example talk a about big
> > fonts meaning big type size and I often reply by asking " A big font,
> > how many megabytes is it?" >>
>
> > ...and there are still some that will ask, "How much does it weigh?"
> > or "How many 'A's in the font?"
>
> three, surely? if it's a "big" font, wouldn't you expect one Latin, one
> Greek and one Cyrillic?
>
> or do you count accented characters separately? =A0 . . . =A0 /phil

----------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------------------------------

A really big font would be a Chinese language font, I suppose.

Bill

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 02:32:52 -0500, Armadillo wrote
(in article <op.t9jgk2sn29ay2f@lapdillo.pp.htv.fi>):

> I like uppercase and lowercase terms just because they include piece of 
> printing tradition. And there is more, the term leading for (increasing) line 

> spacing comes from adding lead strips between the lines

I'll have to admit that there is indeed much to be said for preserving 
tradition, and in that sense "upper case", "lower case", and "leading" do 
serve that purpose. I guess I'll have to soften my objection to the use of 
those terms.

-- 
James Leo Ryan ..... Austin, Texas ..... taliesinsoft@mac.com

Bill wrote:
> On Apr 13, 11:16 am, phil chastney
> <phil.hates.s...@amadeus.munged.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> On Apr 13, 3:32 am, Armadillo <re...@newsgroup.pls> wrote:
>>> << two cases fill of lead. Some people for example talk a about big
>>> fonts meaning big type size and I often reply by asking " A big font,
>>> how many megabytes is it?" >>
>>> ...and there are still some that will ask, "How much does it weigh?"
>>> or "How many 'A's in the font?"
>> three, surely? if it's a "big" font, wouldn't you expect one Latin, one
>> Greek and one Cyrillic?
>>
>> or do you count accented characters separately?   . . .   /phil
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> A really big font would be a Chinese language font, I suppose.

or CJK of some sort, it seems

STIXGeneral is an order of magnitude smaller than most CJK fonts, but it 
does include 7 A's  --  is that enough for you?   . . .   /phil

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:34:05 -0500, TaliesinSoft
<taliesinsoft@mac.com> wrote:

>  instead of the much more elegant, at least to me, "majuscule" and 
>"minuscule" which directly refer to the characteristics of the letters 
>themselves. Unfortunately, if I use majuscule and miniscule in conversations 
>most people have no idea what I am talking about. 

Score: minuscule: 2, miniscule: 1

Even when you know better, it's not hard to do that.

More disturbingly, many people insist that "miniscule" is correct and
"minuscule" wrong.

I like the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary definition:

miniscule. adjective
a common spelling of minuscule that is not correct.

But does anyone listen....

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **