Re: Polytonic Greek very OT

suzmccarth wrote:

> I think this may be too OT - but I did not look at Doug's source
> code. So I did not know what font families he defined. I don't have
> any of those he defined except Lucida Sans Unicode which I have
> never used for Greek because it doesn't have any of the precomposed
> characters.
>
> I have not installed the other fonts yet because I am trying to test
> out what people see in schools and libraries, on non-customized
> machines. So the only fonts I have for Greek are Palatino Linotype,
> which is the only one that looks remotely like classical that I
> know, and Tahoma, modern, which doea almost everything, and
> Microsoft Sans Serif, a relatively complete set of characters, but
> also modern not classical.

I don't know what those particular ones look like, but note that
Classicists have been using "modern"-looking, i.e. sans serif, Greek
fonts for decades -- at Cambridge UP certainly, perhaps not at Oxford
UP. (Unless you're simply referring to the presence of the full panoply
of Classical accents.)

The book I just edited/typeset has some passages in accented Greek. The
author used an unattractive font called "SPIonic," but it's not
compatible with the one called "Greek Classical" that came with the
publisher's Winbox. The former uses separate accent letters, the latter
is fully precomposed, but not even the bare letters are coded the same.
The former might be based on Symbol, with its Greek characters on the
corresponding QWERTY keys; when Word does its "I know better than you"
thing and converts the Greek back to Roman, the latter displays mostly
non-alphabetic, non-ASCII-range characters.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...