Difference between revisions of "Talk:OSIS Tutorial"
(→Long s) |
(→Long s) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:Please sign edits to discussion pages by adding four tilde. This get converted automatically to your username with a timestamp. [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 15:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC) | :Please sign edits to discussion pages by adding four tilde. This get converted automatically to your username with a timestamp. [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 15:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
| − | Long s is equivalent to ſ | + | Long s is equivalent to ſ and I have replaced 'f' with it in the example text, where appropriate. --[[User:Wlerin|Wlerin]] 00:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:54, 24 March 2009
Long s
I would like to take issue with the representation of the "long s" of the original text with the letter 'f'.
If you look carefully at the graphical representation you link to you will notice that while the letter f has a cross-stroke (extending both sides of the vertical), the long s does NOT have a cross stroke, but merely a stub extending to the left of the vertical.
In fonts corresponding to this older typography, a "long s" was used at the beginning and in the middle of words, while a "round s" (which looks like our s) was used at the end.
It is thus plain wrong (in that it alters the meaning of the content, "fifh" not being the same word as "fish" at all, nor, obviously, to move to the New Testament, is Jefus the same as Jesus) to write f where the original has a long s -- the proper representation of long s in a font which does not have that glyph is the ordinary, "round" s.
- Please sign edits to discussion pages by adding four tilde. This get converted automatically to your username with a timestamp. David Haslam 15:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Long s is equivalent to ſ and I have replaced 'f' with it in the example text, where appropriate. --Wlerin 00:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
