Re: A new script

andrew writes:
 > On 10/14 01:50  Tim May wrote:
 >
 > > Okay, they're up:
 > [snip]
 > > They're all rather large files, I'm afraid, but I don't find them
 > > unnacceptable on dialup.  The PNGs look a little better than the
 > > JPEGS, but it's not that noticeable.
 > >
 > > Someone let me know if this worked.  I hope so - I don't like using
 > > the web interface to upload things, and so far I haven't been able to
 > > log in there with an FTP client.
 > >
 > It looks fine to me.  I find the consonant descriptions easier to read
 > in the JPEGs rather than the PNGs.  It's an interesting looking font.
 > Are the stems and the vowels at line level, with the 'tails' below the
 > line, or are the vowels written as superset?
 >
 > - andrew.

I'm surprised you find them easier to read in the JPEGS - perhaps I
had smoothing turned on, and it's acted sike font antialiasing?  Well,
if it helps, so much the better.

If it's handwritten on lined paper, then yes, the horizontal stems and
the base of the bodies of the vowels are at line level, with the tails
below.  In my handwriting, though, the stems tend to slant upwards a
little.  These images are perhaps best thought of as a kind of bold
modern font suitable for storefronts and the covers of children's
books, with other possible styles looking a bit more delicate.  I just
used thes style here becouse it's easier to do regularly with the
tools at my disposal (the stroke thickness doesn't change, for one
thing, so each stroke can be a single line).