Timeline for Standard command for "acid free paper" symbol?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 22:59 | vote | accept | northerntown | ||
| Sep 19, 2012 at 20:54 | comment | added | David Carlisle | ah reading the text good idea! (I just did a google image search and the svg showed up:-) | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 20:51 | comment | added | Heiko Oberdiek | @DavidCarlisle Unhappily Wikipedia says: "Note that this image does not appear to be the genuine symbol, but instead appears to be a circled '8' rotated a quarter-turn counter-clockwise. It should be replaced by the proper glyph, if available." | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 20:29 | answer | added | Heiko Oberdiek | timeline score: 15 | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 19:31 | comment | added | David Carlisle | wikipedia have it as a scalable svg as well upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Acid-free_paper.svg | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 18:23 | comment | added | Stephan Lehmke | That's why I didn't write this as an answer (or your question would be closed as too localised ;-) Still I think if your publisher has a certain symbol in mind which certifies some property of your book, you should by all means use that one and not a generic one... | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 18:21 | comment | added | northerntown | @StephanLehmke: Well, you're offering a reasonable solution for the larger problem. But I'm just wondering if this symbol has made its way into LaTeX. I'd always prefer a wholly LaTeX solution, if possible. | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 18:18 | comment | added | Stephan Lehmke | So ask your publisher for a print-quality version, preferably PDF. It's his responsibility anyway that the right symbol is displayed (maybe he even got a certificate on the durability or whatever). | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 18:16 | history | edited | northerntown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
located symbol in Unicode
|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 17:57 | comment | added | northerntown |
@StephanLehmke: Actually, the original .png isn't very sharp. Wikipedia's is sharper, but it doesn't look very good, either.
|
|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 17:42 | comment | added | Werner♦ | Note that Wikipedia lists it as "An approximation of the acid-free-paper symbol"... | |
| Sep 19, 2012 at 17:38 | comment | added | Stephan Lehmke |
If the .png is sufficiently hi-res for high-quality printing, why not just include what the publisher sent you? I think it's usual to include icons or symbols into a masthead which aren't ordinary letters by any measure.
|
|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 17:36 | history | edited | northerntown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edit of the editor's edit, for clarity
|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 17:34 | history | edited | percusse | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 26 characters in body
|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 16:59 | history | edited | northerntown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 238 characters in body
|
| Sep 19, 2012 at 16:52 | history | asked | northerntown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
