My go-to site for Unicode symbols is graphemica.com.
I like that you show very directly the different use cases, but miss different encodings and the ability to browse unicode sequentially.
Then you need to curl the URL, pipe it to an .html file, and then search the resulting file for "@font-face". The only place that has the @font-face rule for this fancy font is inside <template> syntax, meaning it will do nothing (template content is inert) until JS clones that template into the DOM as active content.
Correct. The code editor that has the subscript: "The colors in the HTML snippet above comes from within the font itself, the code is plain text, and requires no JavaScript."
Which doesn't work without JS. So adding the @font-face to the page itself, so that things works even without JS, would be lovely.
Which is basically HDPE (plastic) foil with limestone filler. And a whole website full of marketing that somehow never mentions that 20% of the material is non-renewable (made from petroleum products) and not biodegradable.
Yes, they say its HDPE, but then conveniently in all their talk about sustainability, they somehow forget to talk about where HDPE actually comes from. Just that it being composed of carbon and hydrogen somehow makes it "clean". Which, I guess, is something you could also say about things like gasoline. Plastic shopping bags are also made of polyethylene. So are they sustainable as well?
Sure it is. But it's also nowhere near cost competitive and so no one does. They also don't even claim they're using anything else than "normal" HDPE made from ethylene distilled from crude oil.
They don't use "normal" HDPE, they use recycled HDPE which means they don't know what's inside their feedstock and it definitively means you can't get rid of the paper by burning it, because you're also burning whatever mystery chemicals remain inside.
The premise is nice, but downsides noted in another comment, usability is also a problem.
It's much heavier than a normal notebook, and the surface is basically an extremely fine grit sandpaper. It works great with pencils and ballpoints, but wetter pens (gel, rollerball) do not dry as quick. Also, forget fountain pens. You'll be eating away your nib as I write on that paper.
I have a couple of these notebooks, but they sit unused for now.
Limestone itself is not hard enough to wear down metal pen nibs, but "stone paper" does slightly polish them, presumably due to impurities in the limestone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbqxasFZwsI
The amount of polish is dependent on the tipping alloy of the particular nib.
For example Lamy’s tipping alloy is softer than others, so that polishing becomes excessive to the point of changing nib size. I have an old safari which writes broad after ten years of use (the nib is marked medium).
Pilot and Sailor uses harder tipping alloys. Schmidt is also harder than Lamy, but softer than Japanese counterparts.
(Yes, I have a lot of pens for quite some time :) )
Are you saying you've been using "stone paper" for ten years? Or are you getting this polishing from the sizing agents and random contamination on real paper?
No, I get the polishing from normal, yet high quality paper. Think Rhodia or similar class, not Tomoe River or similar.
I deliberately polished a nib once, on rough brown paper. Not Lamy, but a Pilot Metropolitan.
You can polish a Lamy by regularly using it. It becomes evident in a couple of months, and becomes buttery smooth in a year. No special treatment is necessary.
While paper feels very smooth to human skin, in fact it's not. If it was perfectly smooth, no pen or pencil could write on the surface (e.g.: pencil on a whiteboard).
Since the point of a pen nib is extremely small, even a small weight concentrates to that point and the nib tipping is under a lot of pressure even when you don't press while writing. As a result, when combined with the paper surface, the nib is polished slowly.
Again, this is very depending on the tipping alloy used by the manufacturer, and the result is different between manufacturers.
Your link says ſ (the long s) didn't disappear (from English) until several hundred years after the movable type printing press and makes no mention of physical problems when using that letter, suggesting instead removal gave a type a more modern feel:
> Pioneer of type design John Bell (1746–1831), who started the British Letter Foundry in 1788, is often "credited with the demise of the long s".[12] Paul W. Nash concluded that the change mostly happened very fast in 1800, and believes that this was triggered by the Seditious Societies Act. To discourage subversive publications, this required printing to name the identity of the printer, and so in Nash's view gave printers an incentive to make their work look more modern.
It's more of a pet theory I have. The 1787 Printer's grammar mentions the following:
"Kerned Letters being attended with more trouble than other Sorts, Founders are sometimes sparing in casting them; whereas they rather require a larger number than their Casting-Bill specifies; considering the chance which Kerned Letters stand, to have their Beaks broke, especially the Roman f, when it stands at the end of a line, where it is exposed to other accidents, besides those from the lye-brush: but in still more danger are Kerned Letters of the Italic; especially d f l, when they stand, with their Beaks unguarded, at the end of lines; and at the beginning of lines, f g j [long s] y run a great hazard; though of these, f and [long s] in particular are most liable to suffer."[0]
So, foundries are less likely to cast letters that break easily. This is just 4 years before Bell dropped the long s, so while the other reasons outlined in the Wikipedia are probably the main reasons, I speculate that it was also an economic decision based on them breaking quite easily. Especially when the new "modern" look required ever sharper and finer details.
And my point was that it is (partly) this material aspect of typography that contributed to the disappearance of a whole letter from English written language. Doesn't really matter if it's hundreds of years after the "invention" of printing press, it's still related to it.
Related to, perhaps, but not so relevant as my comment was in response to mousethatroared writing 'As I understand it, English lost a lot of characters when the movable type printing press was created.'
Also, the long s is not a letter of the English alphabet but rather a form of the letter 's', like how ꝛ (the r rotunda) is an archaic variant form of the letter 'r'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_rotunda
Similar, I believe, to how Greek σ when in the word-final position is ς, but both are lower-case sigma.
For more, read Paul Nash's "The abandoning of the long s in Britain in 1800", which mentions the material and economic aspects, but then digs deeper into why it happened so suddenly in 1800 (which he speculates is realted to the Act).
My wish is for a fast SVG renderer in the browser. At the moment, basic vector drawing is fast, but almost any use of filters or effects lags the browser. Theres a lot that SVG could do for (web) UI, but won't because it's so slow. Here's a small thought experiment I made a while ago for using SVG for more unconventional webdesign. Sadly it lags a lot.
reply