ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 6 days agoGood penmanship ruleslrpnk.netimagemessage-square8fedilinkarrow-up1601arrow-down13
arrow-up1598arrow-down1imageGood penmanship ruleslrpnk.netByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 6 days agomessage-square8fedilink
minus-squaregrrgyle@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·edit-26 days agoHaha I have pretty nice writing, so what I do when I write a proper name of some entity I don’t like is run my thumb over it to smudge it. Frankly I think this is a style missing from the usual typographic emphases. Sure we’ve got bold for impact italics for notability underline for attention strikethrough for errata (closest one) And combinations thereof. But where is the style of emphasis for ire? I bemoan this typographical poverty, friends, for I have much which disgusts me of late, and I am so so so painfully petty.
minus-squarebarsoap@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·6 days agoNo underline in CommonMark, that’s a link. Which isn’t underlined on my end because it’s not the 1990s, any more. U͟n͟i͟c͟o͟d͟e͟ ͟w͟o͟r͟k͟s͟… more or less. It’s a hack. 𝒞𝓊𝓇𝓈𝒾𝓋ℯ 𝓉ℯ𝓃𝒹𝓈 𝓉ℴ 𝓌ℴ𝓇𝓀 𝒻𝒾𝓃ℯ, 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔰𝔬 𝔡𝔬𝔢𝔰 𝔟𝔩𝔞𝔠𝔨𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔯.
Haha I have pretty nice writing, so what I do when I write a proper name of some entity I don’t like is run my thumb over it to smudge it.
Frankly I think this is a style missing from the usual typographic emphases. Sure we’ve got
strikethroughfor errata (closest one)And combinations thereof. But where is the style of emphasis for ire?
I bemoan this typographical poverty, friends, for I have much which disgusts me of late, and I am so so so painfully petty.
No underline in CommonMark, that’s a link. Which isn’t underlined on my end because it’s not the 1990s, any more. U͟n͟i͟c͟o͟d͟e͟ ͟w͟o͟r͟k͟s͟… more or less. It’s a hack. 𝒞𝓊𝓇𝓈𝒾𝓋ℯ 𝓉ℯ𝓃𝒹𝓈 𝓉ℴ 𝓌ℴ𝓇𝓀 𝒻𝒾𝓃ℯ, 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔰𝔬 𝔡𝔬𝔢𝔰 𝔟𝔩𝔞𝔠𝔨𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔯.