On 30/01/2004 09:44, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
... The latter would be easier
to implement, but then would lead to arguments among the
perfectionists as to why "small capital" should be a secondary
weight distinction when capital versus small is a tertiary
weight distinction. And so on and so on...
Thank you, Ken. Well, this perfectionist is arguing why this should be a
PRIMARY weight distinction when capital versus small is tertiary,...
In any case, these small capitals are very, very unlikely to
count much in sorting of any real corpus of data, and even if
they do, the mechanism of tailoring is always available for
people to tweak the table into exactly the behavior they
prefer.
--Ken
... but I agree that it is of no practical significance.
--
Peter Kirk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
http://www.qaya.org/
