Taco Hoekwater wrote: > Hi, > > Be warned, this entire reply does not answer any questions ;-)
OK > Jano Kula wrote: >> Not always. A year ago a graphic designer used it a quiet creative way >> in the book of interviews. All the questions or persons were underlined, >> often hyphenated. It was an experiment and it worked. By the way, some >> of the caption and figure alingment Mojca asked for was used there also. >> I've put few sample pages here (done in LaTeX): >> >> http://web.iol.cz/kula/sample.pdf (1,5MB). > > Perhaps I am way too old-fashioned, but that looks rather ugly to me. Sure you are ;) Modern designs are modern designs. But don't worry you are not the only one. We have spent many hours, did many experiments and I was afraid of using it also. The result was a pragmatic solution when all the possibilities mentioned below were not usable in the book with many different situations we needed to handle. I was very suprised when the designer (experienced, respected and well aware of typography history and present) came up with this solution. I can't say I like it, but in print it wasn't that ugly as I was expecting. What I liked more than this solution was the courage to breake the rules we are all aware of (btw, like Godard used to do in his films; the book is a collection of interviews with him). >> So not for emphasis but as a graphic element it is -- and will be -- used. > > IMO, > > graphic element == emphasis Imagine the form with prescribed empty lines (lines, dots, dashes) and the pieces of predifined text on them in the schoolbook. > Backgrounds, colorization, larger or different typeface, indentation, > additional vertical space, they are all tools to draw extra attention > to particular bits of the text. Hence, whether we like it or not, we must be able to use underlining. Greetings, Jano _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
