The Initiative for Fair Open Access Publishing in South Asian Studies
foasas.org | contact@foasas.org
Dear Giulio (if I may),
Let’s not leave your question unanswered. In my experience, the vast majority of colleagues don’t like to read a text with too many mixed upper and lower case letters. They may use HK for certain software purposes, but never for reading. There is also the problem that you cannot adapt words in HK to the spelling of a language written with Latin letters (e.g., proper names such as Śaṅkara would no longer be so easily recognizable). Let’s not even start with what autocorrect does in such cases.
Best regards,
Dominik
Dear list members,I refrained from this question since I've been following this very interesting list (a couple of years) feeling that it wasn't the case to ask such a banal question in such an high-profile list. But today I dare to ask you very knowledgeable people (I really learned a lot of things since I am following this list and I am really grateful to all who wrote on the many interesting points tackled), why don't you use Harvard-Kyoto?It would be so much easier for me to follow what interests me the most in all this (and what I might have a chance to contribute in -- a very slight chance indeed, to be frank), that is your interpretations of sanskrit passages.I have no problem in reading Gretil Titus all the dictionary the mahAbhArata etc. but your passages come to me full of question marks: I know it's me who must be like a troglodite of fonts, but it is also that I love Harvard-Kyoto and I don't understand what can be found wrong with it.Do you find something wrong with HK? And if not, why don't you use it in the emails?Thank you,Giulio Geymonat
_______________________________________________ INDOLOGY mailing list INDOLOGY@list.indology.info https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology