[NTG-context] Re: \inch not doing the expected thing (what I expect, anyway).

[Jim <zlists+context@jdvb.ca>]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 19:35 (+0000), Keith McKay wrote:

> In last night's ConTeXt meeting there was a discussion on the use of
> vertical or slanted double primes for inches. The general consensus was that
> slanted should be used.

>  I had a look in my copy of The Elements of Typographic Style version 3.0 by
> Richard Bringhurst and he says (page 307]:

> "Double Prime. An abbreviation for inches (1" =2.54 cm) and for seconds of
> arc (360" = 1 degree). Not to be confused with quotation marks, the double
> acute, nor with dumb quotes. Prime and double prime are rarely found on text
> fonts. See also prime. [U+2033]"

> Similarly for prime he says (page 316):

> "Prime. An abbreviation for feet (1' = 12") and for minutes of arc (60' = 1
> degree). Singe and double primes should not be confused with apostrophes,
> dumb quotes or genuine quotation marks, though in some faces (frakturs
> especially) these glyphs may all have a similar shape and a pleasant slope.
> See also apostrophes, double prime, dumb quotes and quotation marks.
> [U+2032]"

> Hope this clarifies things.


At the meeting I said I was going to look around and get back.  Mea culpa
for letting Keith beat me to it.  I guess he deserves another glass of his
Macallan 30 year old single malt scotch.

Aside from references to The Elements of Typographic Style (as quoted by
Keith above), I found various sites which claim that the inch symbol is
prime marks:
-> https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/data-center-software/how-to-type-the-inch-symbol-
-> https://www.itprotoday.com/microsoft-windows/how-to-type-the-inch-symbol-
   (essentially the same article as above)
-> https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Punctuation/faq0125.html
-> https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/46055/typesetting-with-inch-symbols-and-sizes-in-inches
   (see keme1's claim about 1/2 way down)
-> https://community.adobe.com/t5/indesign-discussions/typing-symbol-for-quot-inches-quot/m-p/1718417
   See "Correct answer by FivePicaPica"
-> https://webdesignledger.com/common-typography-mistakes-apostrophes-versus-quotation-marks/

This one says to use straight, not curly quotes, but is silent on the issue
of whether the quote is slanted (thus a prime):
-> https://www.nobledesktop.com/typography-rules

These ones calls them prime, but just say they are straight:
-> https://practicaltypography.com/foot-and-inch-marks.html
-> https://typographyforlawyers.com/foot-and-inch-marks.html
   Amusingly, this seems to be a plagiarism of the one above.
   Or maybe vice versa.

This one says it shows the correct glyphs, but the glyphs shown are
straight up and down:
-> https://www.myfonts.com/pages/fontscom-learning-fontology-level-3-signs-and-symbols-correct-marks?srsltid=AfmBOoqI3Wrm6pwLcCzVJGJIpG3mQlnCpE883HqabgwqZh84YTFePlyp


I don't recognize any of those (with the possible exception of the Chicago
manual of style) as definitive opinions.

But I will say that each and every time I discussed the issue with Hermann
Zaph, he said that inch and foot marks are straight lines with a slant.


I found nothing at all about what to do when setting italic text.  It makes
sense to me to slant them a bit more, but that is just a gut feeling.


I think that is likely everything I will have to say on this topic.  No
doubt that makes people happy.  :-)

                                Jim
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman3/lists/ntg-context.ntg.nl
webpage  : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / https://context.aanhet.net (mirror)
archive  : https://github.com/contextgarden/context
wiki     : https://wiki.contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________