Content deleted Content added
→Naught vs. nought: new section |
|||
Line 16:
I believe that it is worth mentioning, at least, that, in relation to digital text in word processing applications, superior letters and superscript have become synonymous, and that they are both produced the same way and are identical in modern typography. Could we say that superscript and superior letters only differ in context regarding function, but that otherwise, in appearance, they are identical? --[[User:Illinois347|Illinois347]] 18:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
:Though "superior letters" doesn't include numbers, which are more commonly used in modern English writing, from what I can tell, all superior letters are correctly described as superscript letters. (The clashing intros above still haven't been harmonized.) Though there are some differences in traditional typography depending on use (e.g. math equation vs. prose ordinal) these differences are described in [[Subscript and superscript]]. The section [[Subscript and superscript#Superscripts that typically do not extend above the ascender line]] notes that this also happens for some non-letters, so it is weird to have an article only for the letters that do that, when letterness is not the distinguishing characteristic. [[Superior letter]] has only 5k of readable prose, [[Subscript and superscript]] only has 14k, so these will easily fit together without being too long, especially when redundant prose is eliminated. Right now it feels to me like each of these articles only tells two-thirds of the same story. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 05:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
== Other Script Positions ==
| |||