Oacute vs. o with kreska — Typophile archive

pablohoney7719 January 2005 · 12:37

ok, here's my question of the day:
which is better--
1) to design diacritics that allow oacute and o with kreska to be represented by the same glyph. bascially in this scenario one would need to design fairly steep accents (acute and grave), correct? How acceptable are these steeper accents in other languages that use diacritics?
2) to use the OpenType locl feature to make this replacement. I've heard that no apps currently support language sensitive replacements so this may not be very well implemented at the present.
So which would be the preferred method to resolve this problem?
Also, has unicode recognized the difference between the acute accent and the kreska?
Any light you could shed would be appreciated... thnx.

John Hudson

In my experience, most language users are happy with a fairly steep acute accent, which will serve as a kreska. The exception is actually the preference for quite flat accents in Czech and Slovak, so if anything these are the languages that I would address using the locl feature.

Unicode does not distinguish between the kreska and the acute accent: they are the same character.