www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - What is this odd letter "E" ?
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
What is this odd letter "E" ?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 20649
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 pm    Post subject: What is this odd letter "E" ? Reply with quote

My wife recently bought a new cookbook. In Chapter 3, and only in Chapter 3, the nutritional analysis paragraph of every recipe looks roughly like this:





Everywhere else in the book, the same section simply says CALORIES, exactly as we'd expect for a book written in English.

"CALORIES" does not translate to "CAERIES" in any language that I've tried, and for that matter I can't find that letter "E" with the double diacritical mark in any subset of Unicode that I've tried.

So I'm baffled.

Can anybody recognize what's going on here? Is there some plausible mechanism by which "LO" could turn into that odd typesetting symbol "E" with the double diacritical?

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TheLostVertex



Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Posts: 314
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2020 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like a circumflex with hook, used in Vietnamese. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/

My guess is there was some software bug or corruption that happened during the production of the book, and L and O got merged into the wrong character. If one cared enough, you could likely track down what the character encoding used, based on the info we have.

Edit: forum software does not like that character in urls, and wiktionary does not allow escape characters in the url. Oh well. Mad
_________________
-Steven
Flickr Macro Rig Control Software
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 20649
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2020 12:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
forum software does not like that character in urls, and wiktionary does not allow escape characters in the url. Oh well.

Heh, we have a hack for that: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ể

The trick is to URL encode whatever the forum software doesn't like, then bury the whole mess inside a [url= tag pair so it looks right and also, separately, links to the right place. As code, it ends up looking like this:
Code:

[url=https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BB%83]https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ể[/url]

Thanks for the tip about the weird character. I'll see if I can work out some details tomorrow.

Any ideas from other people would be very welcome also!

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Macro_Cosmos



Joined: 15 Jan 2018
Posts: 632
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is pretty weird.

I did print an assignment on a friend's computer running some weird Chinese PDF reader, the result was all kinds of weirdness. All my inserted formula for example turned into series of gibberish that can't be comprehended at all. Whack Chinese characters that I don't recognise and doesn't even exist in typical dictionaries will show up too (must use online ones that include very obscure characters).

Luckily I found out before handing it in, saved a heart attack. I used adobe's PDF reader and the print was absolutely fine.

So I think this is some kind of bug/corruption, and it happened when the book was being printed. However, why did it only affect one chapter? Maybe they had different printers printing different chapters, then it's all bound into a book? I don't know the process of printing books.

From Wikipedia:
Quote:
Ê is the 9th letter of the Vietnamese alphabet and represents /e/. In Vietnamese phonology, diacritics can be added to form five forms to represent five tones of ê:


Here's how it can be typed, might help? https://fontmeme.com/alt-codes-shortcuts-html-codes-for-special-characters/
Maybe it's a typo? I think details of the book, such as the date it was written and/or printed will help as well.

Here's Times New Roman VS Calibri. The hook is placed differently.

_________________
Personal Flickr page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133023063@N04/
Blog still under construction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 20649
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Macro_Cosmos wrote:
I think details of the book, such as the date it was written and/or printed will help as well.

It's the "WINTER 2020" issue of the periodical "Cooking Light" (http://cookinglight.com).

Bottom of the title page says "PRINTED IN THE USA".

The book/magazine is only about 1/4" thick, soft cover, looks like glue binding with no stitching. Chapter 3 is not self-contained as printed; its first and last pages have reverse sides that belong to the surrounding chapters 2 and 4.

I looked for but did not find contact information for somebody on the magazine's editorial staff that I could ask.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Macro_Cosmos



Joined: 15 Jan 2018
Posts: 632
Location: Sydney

PostPosted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 3:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ahh I see. It's a very modern print then. I was thinking if it's a book from the 80s or something, the matter would be a lot more complicated, was adobe PDF around back then?

I think we'd have an ok chance if we contact the authors and printing agency/company. They might be able to address this, or at least remove some theories from the list. Authors would know if they made an odd typo or not. If the most obvious is out of question, then it's likely some kind of error on the computational side (if that makes sense).
_________________
Personal Flickr page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133023063@N04/
Blog still under construction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group