<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/23/2019 5:25 PM, Lieven L. Litaer
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ac632048-37b8-f844-812e-b3484e4c6afb@gmx.de">On
5/23/2019 12:13 PM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">You have weird apostrophes there. I
suggest simple ' or fancy ’, but
<br>
never ‘.
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
Am 23.05.2019 um 19:56 schrieb SuStel:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">I can't help myself:
<br>
<br>
What difference does it make?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Graphic designers prefer to use a<br>
so-called typographic apostrophe, which looks identical to the
right<br>
single quotation mark (and also uses the same symbol), i.e. it<br>
resembles a small nine. This has been used in TKD, KGT, TKW, and
many<br>
other sources - including Okrand who uses it in his mails. It can
be<br>
written on windows computers by holding down the Alt-key + 0146,
HTML<br>
uses the code #8217. <br>
<br>
The apostrophe is the RIGHT single quotation mark, but not the
left one.
<br>
It doesn't only look very ugly when you read a text like {QI‘tu’
‘och
<br>
vI’el‘a’} where the quotes jump back and forth, but it's also just
the
<br>
wrong symbol.
<br>
<br>
That's the difference it makes.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>Okay, so just to be clear, your reasons are:</p>
<p>1) Okrand has used a right single quotation mark (U+2019), and</p>
<p>2) You feel the right single quotation mark is the most
aesthetically pleasing.</p>
<p>I don't see how this leaves the apostrophe (U+0027) an acceptable
character to use. Typographers certainly don't like to use it for
aesthetic reasons, and Okrand doesn't make any particular use of
it. Why recommend it, then? Not all software will equate the two
characters in searches.<br>
</p>
<p>Is there an acceptable typeface for Klingon? A recommended line
spacing? Do bullets have to be triangles? How far down the
typography hole do we go? I'm more careful with my typography than
anyone else on this list — who else bothers to use real em dashes,
for instance? — but even I don't go out of my way to produce
typographically pleasing quotation marks or apostrophes in email.
I don't see how it can be an argument for anything except one's
subjective aesthetic tastes. Even then, it can't be all that
strong an argument, given the lack of any other particular
typographic care on the list.</p>
<p>To be clear: I agree that right single quotation marks are the
most aesthetically please choice for the <b>qaghwI'.</b> I just
don't see any reason to claim that left single quotation marks, or
even apostrophes, are "just the wrong symbol."<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>