Slashed O and slash as diacritic

Igor Freiberger's picture

Slash as a diacritic is almost only known to produce Øø. For these glyphs, there are specific design recommendations (slash would be centered and its extremes would match or be near the O extremes). Here are the Øø from the font I'm preparing:

Slashed Oo.

Although much less common, there are other characters with the diacritic slash, as A, C, E and T. But in all fonts I verify, slash applied to these letters is clearly different than the Øø. It is usually steeper and goes well beyond baseline/caps height.

You can find a list of fonts with these characters here: A, C, E, and T.

Maybe this is due to the angle of Øø slash, which produces bad results for AaEeTt, whose widths are smaller than Oo. It also cannot be centered exactly without causing some undesired overlaps.

I made some tests and decided to also use a different slash for these letters, as found in other fonts. But I'm quite unsure if this is the better solution:

Slashed letters.

What is your opinion?

Frode Bo Helland's picture

Øø: I would split those slashes in three and rotate the mid part ever so slightly counter-clockwise.

Igor Freiberger's picture

Beautiful idea, Frode! Simple and very wise. I saw the optical illusion but was not able to formulate any solution. Thanks a lot.

riccard0's picture

To me, the most glaring difference is that Ø and ø appear to be actual letters, where constant use developed proper design guidelines. While the others appear to be just constructions, where the juxtaposition of a slash bears no connection either with handwriting nor with the shape of the letter. This is most evident on A-slash.
That’s not a problem with your solution (which works) but with the glyphs themselves.
Out of curiosity, how different is your ¢ from c-slash?

Igor Freiberger's picture

Agreed. Øø have unit, the others not. I especially dislike slashed A (and with the same slash from Ø it becomes much worse) but do not see a better way to design this.

Here are my cents:

riccard0's picture

The only improvement that I can see could improve the A would be either intersect the slash at the left foot or going unconventional and make it parallel to the left stem.
Either way, you’ll loose the balance on the other glyphs.

Interesting that your ¢ terminals are different from those of c.

Igor Freiberger's picture

your ¢ terminals are different from those of c.

It's based on petite cap C. I made monetary symbols using small caps or petite caps, except dong, livre-tournois, cent and mill. But there are corrections to do here: Euro terminals need to be stronger and dong is still a bit heavy.

Currency symbols.

Again, I agree with you: a parallel bar (to left side of A) surely produces the best result. There is a font using this, Linux Libertine I guess. But unhappily these characters are used in the same languages and the conflict between slopes become very ugly.

Here is another try for slashed A, C, E and T. Closed counterspace is still problematic in A. But if bar is moved to the right, the left base appear very thick. So only acceptable possibilities are to coincide with left base or to stand far from it:

Slashed ACET with an Ø-like bar.

riccard0's picture

I think your new set works better. Given they will always be ugly glyphs ;-)

Igor Freiberger's picture

I think it's fair to give a feedback about how the issue was concluded. I decided to adopt the same slash from Ø, with small adjusts. For example: slash for E is thinner than for C due to optical illusion.

Lowercase also follows this criteria. For t, I extended the bar a bit to the right, so it glues to slash.

Slashed uppercase and lowercase sets.

I must thanks Frode Frank once more. His tip is really useful and I'm using it in many situations aside Øø. This gives an idea about how I used it to correct optical illusions:

Optical correction for slash and stroke.

Frode Bo Helland's picture

I'm glad it was useful, Igor. It'd be interesting to try my hands at these. I'm thinking a slash with a similar angle to the left leg on A might solve some problems.

Andreas Stötzner's picture

Remember that the livre-tournois sign is a sort of an l-b abbreviation (“libra”- pound).

DTY's picture

Remember that the livre-tournois sign is a sort of an l-b abbreviation (“libra”- pound).

Is it? My impression was that it is a ligated l-t. Admittedly, the handwriting often doesn't make it very clear.

Igor Freiberger's picture

Andreas, I always thought it was a kind of l-t. After your message, I found some material on the web and in every reference livre-tournois appear as l-t. The proposal for its inclusion in Unicode also uses it this way.

Am I missing something? Where can we get more precise information? Maybe this was already discussed in Signographie, but my Deutsch is enough just to say Bach über Alles... ;-)

Syndicate content Syndicate content