On Tuesday, July 15, 2003 10:42 PM, Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. There must be a kind of `dot' for the i and a kind of `breve'
> sign above the u. Additionally, the connecting lines between the
> characters are wider, something like
>
> / / \/
>
> /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /| /|
> |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/ |/
It's still readable in the ASCII art as "minimum". But this form is sometimes used
abusively by French hand-writters, but is often considered as being abusively "fast"
written with badly formed letters.
The normal handscript is roughly like (use proportional font to see it):
o o
n n n l n n l n n n l l n n n
| | | /| / | | /| / | | | /| | / | | |
| | U U | U U | | U U U | | U
where the connecting edges within the letters are clearly above or below, the
interletter edges are oblique, and the vertical stems are easily countable and
identifiable (this script is learn upright in schools, but often written slightly
slanted to the right, with "italic" style). There little variation for the lowercase
letter forms, but there are quite a lot for the handwritten uppercase letters, with
more or less loopy curves. But due to this tradition (still tought today since the
second half of the XIX-th century), this handwritten form is still recognized by most
people.
