Am 29.05.2013 um 16:56 schrieb Asmus Freytag:
> what aspects should such a study encompass, what are to be its starting points
Just a few thoughts and suggestions, as a possible starting point.
¶1
A certain difficulty lies in the fact that the definition of the subject of
study is not unambiguously obvious or self-evident first and foremost. Usual
terms (symbols, pictographs, ideographs) are more or less vague. On the other
hand, the traditional “plain-text” doctrine is also blurring in the light of
modern communication situations.
Despite that we aim to describe the task as “the study of internationally used
ideographic or pictographic symbols, which are part of modern visual and
textual communication and which occur with obvious similarities in various
usage environments but with a high degree of semantic coherence”.
¶2
The scope of typical usage environments is:
– printed matters and (non-alphabetical) text composing,
– screen interfaces and websites,
– messaging devices and related applications,
– public space signage for orientation,
– maps and similar topographical information graphics.
¶3
The thematical scope of relevant symbols may be structured by a listing like
this:
– General Miscellaneous
– General Orientation
– Hygiene and Medical
– Transportation
– Places
– Commerce and Services
– Gastronomy
– Accommodation
– Tourism and Leisure
– Camping and Caravaning
– Sports
– Human (body)
– Living Beings I – Plants
– Living Beings II – Animals
– Social life
– Items and Objects
– Functional signage and Interfaces
– …
¶4
A more detailed scoring of thematic fields may be structured like this:
GD Transportation
GDA Bicycle traffic
GDB Cars traffic
GDC Busses and Coaches
GDD Railways
GDE Shipping, sea and water traffic
GDF Air traffic
…
¶5 Course of study
A range of typical samples of the usage of ideographic/pictographic symbols
might get documented, studied and analysed. A detailed record of the respective
signage is the target. The next step wil be the comparison of the multitude of
case-studies, this will reveal some insight on typical, e.g. non-exclusive
usage.
¶6
Universality.
We have to bear in mind that a symbol char. “bus” or “envelop” is likely to
occur in many circumstances and various usage environments, but with similar or
matching semantics. Cross-media relevance is a core concern for envisioning
character encodings.
…
just my three ct.s.
Best,
A. Stötzner.
_____________________________________________________________________
Andreas Stötzner
Gestaltung Signographie Fontentwicklung
Wilhelm-Plesse-Straße 32, 04157 Leipzig
0176-86823396
