Re: [dev] A lightwieight and working typesetting system.

Hiho,
On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 11:59:39AM +0200, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
> Szabolcs Nagy >>dixit<< (2009-09-05, 10:35):
also,
> This is purest craps of crap. A high quality book typeset by a
> knowledgeable typesetter is *incomparable* to any automatically
> generated text that you get on screen/PDA or whichever low-resolution
> display system you choose (one that will also usually lack contrast).
>
> Robert Bringhurst makes a parallel that a typesetter with his
> typesetting skills is interpreting text like a musician interprets music
> and gives it final shape for a reader to consume (or appreciate). This
> is somewhat poetic, but definitely strikes a very important point.
>
> High quality fonts, ligatures, proper hyphenation and other subtle
> typographic elements (yes, with lots of added complexity, thank you very
> much) are a *big* gain and make perfect sense when typeset at 2450 dpi;
> pretending that text set on a 90 dpi PDA display by some quicky crap
> pseudo-typesetting engine is equivalent in quality is preposterous.
 (sorry for bottom posting, but this bears quoting)
 this is all fine and dandy, now please get out of my computer,
documentation and reading material in general.

 Books on paper are great, although the interface is a bit dated; I'd
much rather have the 90dpi PDA screen that remembers my position in
multiple books, and sometimes I can even search for stuff.

 I can imagine a few uses where wasting trees and technology on 2450 dpi
technology makes sense (literature), but for the majority of stuff
(manuals, documentation, tutorials, journals, mail) this is completely
ridiculous.

 This is the same as why you don't see those beautiful, hand-made
ironworks on buildings, bridges, etc. any more. They're all great
craftmanship, but completely uneconomical in this age. So sorry it
hurts ya.

Best regards,
 Mate Nagy
Received on Sat Sep 05 2009 - 10:17:15 UTC