|From:||Ollock Ackeop <ollock@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, August 5, 2007, 22:25|
On Sun, 5 Aug 2007 00:24:54 +0200, RenÃ© Uittenbogaard <ruittenb@...>
I'd take the first one. It's clearer for print. Besides, the two are
practically identical -- to me it's just two different fonts of the same
script (or even just the "normal" and "italic" of the same font, if your
script doesn't already have a mode equivalent in function to italics).
>I've been fiddling with the script for CalÃ©nnawn, in order to give it
>a more calligraphic look.
>Old style: http://tinyurl.com/2v6rgk
>New style: http://tinyurl.com/37yk9u
>Actually I like both of them, so now I don't know how to display the
>script at my site :-}