Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
You are missing the point (in fact, several points). At the most pedantic, not machine-solvable (as opposed to not yet machine-solved) is a very specific assertion, and needs some concrete logical proof of non-computability.
Furthermore, the problem itself is sufficiently ill-defined that the assertion is meaningless. As has been pointed out to you several times, different people have different opinions of the level of typography required for the problem to be classed as "solved".
|
I have on most occasions, whether or not I have done so in the piece I quoted, stated that I believed typography to not be machine-solvable without human-level artificial intelligence. While strictly speaking the two statements are not equivalent, in practical terms they certainly are... Unless you anticipate "Rights for Robots" campaigns to start-up within the next few decades--and I don't.
The different opinions mostly come from individuals whose work and profession have nothing whatsoever to do with bookmaking. To be frank, I am not going to pretend they ought to be considered on equal footing with definitions of typography not debased by an ardent desire to only read HTML books in the future.
But let's not even worry about typography's solvability being defined, unless you have some cogent argument to make about how hyphenation-at-display-time can be solved in a way that works for practically (but, to be fair, not literally) all of humanity, not just the anglosphere or the western world. (Comprehensive [as opposed to superficial] hyphenation patterns for
Gikuyu, anyone? [Presumably with autodetection of English and Swahili words included, to which their respective hyphenation ought to be applied.] So)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
I assume you'd be happy to concede that there is no single perfect typographical layout that would be universally recognised, and that even "experts" would disagree about which was superior out of a selection of hand-made layouts? Given that, if the criterion for success is thge perfect layout, then you could trivially say that the problem is not machine-solvable, but it's also unsolvable period.
|
The only people talking about
perfect typography are the ones that prefer HTML books that can barely demonstrate any typography.
The fact that even experts cannot agree on perfect typography is irrelevant.
Experts and even reasonably intelligent and knowledgeable amateurs will be able to recognize good, high quality typography when they see it. But even this is irrelevant at this point.
The problem with display-time typography is that without perfect hyphenation (and sometimes even with perfect hyphenation) there may well be no straightforward way to render without committing blatant, obvious, and egregious typographic errors. And surely you will concede that whether or not experts can agree on what is perfect hyphenation, there are objective standards in most written languages as to what is incorrect hyphenation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
The only meaningful (it seems to me) yardstick for "solved" is when the typography is sufficiently good that the reader is completely happy with it.
|
In the same way that the only yardstick for the value of a diamond ring is how well the Bride-to-be receives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Different people will have different thresholds for this, and many people's can be met with an automated solution. Furthermore, and this is key, just because you claim expertise in this field doesn't make your opinion of what is acceptable to any given reader any more valid than their own.
|
No. My actual level of expertise, which is moderate at best, however does. Much as my car-mechanic's musings of my car's road-worthiness are far more valid than my own, regardless of whether or not I am satisfied with its operation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Different people want different things.
|
Clearly. I don't think this has as thoroughly broad implications as you suggest though.
---
Having said all this... let me somewhat give you what you want me to say:
Yes, I do believe it is possible to get hyphenation and typography right enough for a lot of people to be satisfied. Primarily because it already happened, since a lot of people are fine with no hyphenation and utterly broken typography.
Any improvements will doubtless be welcomed and celebrated by those people as much as anyone. What I do not believe though, is that either hyphenation or typography in general can be gotten to a state where it is objectively of a professional quality (note, I did not say perfect).
- Ahi