 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Don't ask me how I found this, but:
http://thesis.library.caltech.edu/2441/1/Knuth_de_1963.pdf
Anybody have any ideas how this was typeset?
It *looks* like it was written on a typewriter. But that obviously can't
be true, because typewriters don't have Greek letters and other
mathematical symbols on them. So... how?
(Incidentally, I bought a book on Galios Theory from Amazon. It was only
to read complicated formulas...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/12/2014 11:57, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Don't ask me how I found this, but:
>
> http://thesis.library.caltech.edu/2441/1/Knuth_de_1963.pdf
>
> Anybody have any ideas how this was typeset?
>
Probably with a typewriter with additional Greek letters. Academics used
them. (Or at least typists did)
> It *looks* like it was written on a typewriter. But that obviously can't
> be true, because typewriters don't have Greek letters and other
> mathematical symbols on them. So... how?
>
> (Incidentally, I bought a book on Galios Theory from Amazon. It was only
> £4 or something. But it's typeset exactly like this! Makes it quite hard
> to read complicated formulas...)
Welcome to the 20th C. The typeset would be hot metal. You can tell by
the uneven baseline. Pick the book up and look at the page sideways. The
bottom of the letters are all over the place. You might also find that
the loops of "y" and "g" are filled in. This is typical of hot metal.
I looked at the page again and I don't think that it was typed and
scanned. If you find a flaw in one of the letters the flaw should appear
in all instances of that letter. If it was typed by a typewriter. This
is not the case with that image. There is a lower case "m" that looks
skewed and that is not a typewriter fault.
Since the theses is for a Doctoral degree it might have to have been
published (by a printer) to count.
But anyway there are/were typewriters that used Greek fonts as well as
the basic English ones.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21-12-2014 12:57, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Don't ask me how I found this, but:
>
> http://thesis.library.caltech.edu/2441/1/Knuth_de_1963.pdf
>
> Anybody have any ideas how this was typeset?
>
> It *looks* like it was written on a typewriter. But that obviously can't
> be true, because typewriters don't have Greek letters and other
> mathematical symbols on them. So... how?
>
> (Incidentally, I bought a book on Galios Theory from Amazon. It was only
> to read complicated formulas...)
I think though this was typed using a typewriter, although one of the
more advanced ones of that time: electric, with ball-like type heads
that you could switch for other type faces. They were expensive machines
back then. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typewriter
and especially the part about IBM Selectric. Those came on the market in
1961, so that would explain your document.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Don't ask me how I found this, but:
>
> http://thesis.library.caltech.edu/2441/1/Knuth_de_1963.pdf
>
> Anybody have any ideas how this was typeset?
>
> It *looks* like it was written on a typewriter. But that obviously can't
> be true, because typewriters don't have Greek letters and other
> mathematical symbols on them. So... how?
IBM Selectric typewriter.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/12/2014 03:04 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
> IBM Selectric typewriter.
Does that mean you have to change the golfball for each individual
character? (And is that how the subscripts and superscripts work?)
I presume the underlining is done by hand with a ruler.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 18:55:30 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 22/12/2014 03:04 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> IBM Selectric typewriter.
>
> Does that mean you have to change the golfball for each individual
> character? (And is that how the subscripts and superscripts work?)
No, the "golf ball" has an entire character set on it.
> I presume the underlining is done by hand with a ruler.
Nope.
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.12.2014 um 12:57 schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
> Don't ask me how I found this, but:
>
> http://thesis.library.caltech.edu/2441/1/Knuth_de_1963.pdf
>
> Anybody have any ideas how this was typeset?
>
> It *looks* like it was written on a typewriter. But that obviously can't
> be true, because typewriters don't have Greek letters and other
> mathematical symbols on them. So... how?
>
> (Incidentally, I bought a book on Galios Theory from Amazon. It was only
> to read complicated formulas...)
There is some evidence in the scanned document that special symbols like
greek letters were added later, after the bulk of the document had been
typed already; some of those special characters appear to be drawn,
while others appear to be typed.
So it's probably /not/ one of these:
http://blog.modernmechanix.com/mags/MechanixIllustrated/12-1958/double_keyboard.jpg
Sub- and superscript were of course done by moving the paper up or down
manually by a detent(*), typing the letter, then moving the paper back.
(*On a typewriter, the cylinder would usually have detents at fractions
of a nominal line feed; operating the carriage return lever would
advance the paper by multiple such small steps at once, with the exact
number configured via a lever. The cylinder could also be operated
manually via a knob at either side.)
I suppose underline was achieved by overtyping with a special underline
characters; IIRC common typewriters lacked such a special character, and
you'd use the minus instead.
Some special characters were certainly achieved by overtyping as well,
such as the not-equal sign (equal sign and slash) or the "end of proof"
sign (opening and closing square brackets).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now, I really am feeling old! I realise that whole generations are
living now who do /not/ know what a typewriter looks like nor how it
worked. Incredible and sad but that is progress ;-)
My father was a journalist so the typewriter was the centrepiece of his
work and I played/used it too from my most tender years. I knew all the
bells and whistles, and all the smart tricks you could do with them.
Later, at university, I typed my reports on my own typewriter. And then,
during the early years at the Geological Survey, we wrote all the drafts
of our reports and books in the same way. You know where the expression
"cut-and-glue" comes from? Exactly! Writing books was writing (by hand)
-> typing -> emending with pen and and ink -> cutting -> glueing ->
typing again, and again, and again. We also had a nice lady who would
help with the typing of course, whose typing errors we had then to
correct again with pen and ink, and so on... ;-)
The coming of text editors on a central main frame computer you could
reach by /dialling/ a phone number on your phone then changed the world
for ever for us...
...but I suppose even that has been lost from memory and experience.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> On 22/12/2014 03:04 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> IBM Selectric typewriter.
>
> Does that mean you have to change the golfball for each individual
> character? (And is that how the subscripts and superscripts work?)
No. You just select a ball that has regular letters and math symbols.
(each ball had 72 characters, IIRC.)
Super/subscript was done with a different lever or key that raised or
lowered the key slightly. Many typewriters - even the kiddie one I ah
when I was but a wee lad - had that option. and for those that didn't
you simply rolled the sheet up or down using the big rollers at the
back, and then put the sheet back in place to continue typing.
Now, before you say: "but that was a lot of work" We were used to it as
we had to do it whenever we needed to correct a mistake and apply
white-out.
>
> I presume the underlining is done by hand with a ruler.
Probably. You could return the carriage to the left (hence the name
"carriage return" for \r) and type over the words that needed
underlining with the underline symbol, as well, but if you needed to
underline a big portion of the line, it was easier to use a black pen
and a ruler.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Now, I really am feeling old! I realise that whole generations are
> living now who do /not/ know what a typewriter looks like nor how it
> worked. Incredible and sad but that is progress ;-)
>
> My father was a journalist so the typewriter was the centrepiece of his
> work and I played/used it too from my most tender years. I knew all the
> bells and whistles, and all the smart tricks you could do with them.
> Later, at university, I typed my reports on my own typewriter. And then,
> during the early years at the Geological Survey, we wrote all the drafts
> of our reports and books in the same way. You know where the expression
> "cut-and-glue" comes from? Exactly! Writing books was writing (by hand)
> -> typing -> emending with pen and and ink -> cutting -> glueing ->
> typing again, and again, and again. We also had a nice lady who would
> help with the typing of course, whose typing errors we had then to
> correct again with pen and ink, and so on... ;-)
>
> The coming of text editors on a central main frame computer you could
> reach by /dialling/ a phone number on your phone then changed the world
> for ever for us...
>
> ...but I suppose even that has been lost from memory and experience.
>
> Thomas
>
I don't believe a single bit of it. You're just pulling our leg. Next
thing you're going to tell us you had to stand up and walk to the tv to
change the channel!
Sheesh! old folks with their made up stories to make us feel bad!
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
