Khaled, On a typewriter, the same effect can be achieved as "anathemati<half-interval up>s<BS><1 interval down>z<half-interval up>e"
Where would the line between markup and typesetting languages be drawn? Leo On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Khaled Hosny <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 05:51:09PM -0700, Leo Broukhis wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Attached is a part of page 36 of Henry Alford's *The Queen's English: a > > manual of idiom and usage (1888)* [ > > http://archive.org/details/queensenglishman00alfo] > > > > Is the way to indicate alternative s/z spellings used there plain text > > (arguably, if it can be done with a typewriter, it is plain text) > > I see a typeset book not an output of a typewriter. > > > or rich text (ignoring the font size of letters s and z)? > > > > If it's the latter, what's the markup to achieve it? > > Using TeX: > > \def\s{${}^{\rm s}_{\rm z}$} > > 49. How are we to decide between {\it s} and {\it z} in such words as > anathemati\s{}e, cauteri\s{}e, criti\-ci\s{}e, deodori\s{}e, > dogmati\s{}e, > fraterni\s{}e, and the rest? Many of these are derived from Greek > \bye > > Regards, > Khaled >
