Talk:Long s/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Uſage

I have abſolutely no idea on how to uſe it.. Any place I could uſe an normal 's' I can place an 'ſ'? Iſ it that ſimple? Or am I wrong? I probably am, but uſed it wherever I could becauſe I read the talk page before posting and people are juſt crucifying who don't uſe it... o_o' 200.230.213.152 22:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

The rules weren't always applied conſiſtently, but the idea is that all lower-caſe S's should be written as "ſ" unleſs they're at the end of the word. The "s" we generally uſe uſed to be called the "terminal" s. —Chowbok 01:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Or frequently if the s was uſed in pairs; it would be paſsed, not paſſed.--Prosfilaes 13:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... :D 200.230.213.152 20:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Stupid idea: how about creating ſs.wikipedia.org, an wikipedia 'language' uſing only ſ and ß? :D 200.230.213.152 20:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think "ſs" is a language Code. You would have to uſe something like "en-ſ" or "engliſh", ſimilar to "ſimple": simple:. 68.39.174.238 01:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Would be nice to have more about usage in the actual article. It talks mostly about fonts which is OK i guess but probably not what people come to this article looking for. 68.103.144.192 (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, ſo thiſ page uſeſ the long-ſ but not the ß?! I think thiſ iſ a preßing matter that needſ to be addreßed..:Stirb Nicht Vor Mir:. 09:04, 5 Auguſt 2007 (UTC)

ß is not uſed between two vowels (unleß by chance the word is a compound, and both s belong to the firſt.--2001:A60:15A3:2A01:ECAC:DD44:1B67:5A21 (talk) 01:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Alt code

Anyone knows its Alt (and other) codes, like in the ß page?

Macintoſh

   Option+s

Windows

   Alt+0223 (on the numeric keypad), Alt+225 (alſo on the numeric keypad), and Alt+98785 (alſo on the numeric keypad)

Alt+0223, Alt+225 and Alt+98785 all produce ß, not ſ, on my computer. Jake95_(talk!) 19:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It ſeems to be that not only the computer but the application being typed into muſt ſupport Unicode properly. On my computer, typing Alt+0383 in Wordpad or Word or Charmap produces ſ; but in Notepad and this Firefox textarea, it produces ?, regardleſs of the font ſet in Notepad; and in a cmd.exe conſole it produces nothing. It's poſsible to paſte a proper ſ in place but not to activate it with Alt-0383. 146.145.99.210 (talk) 14:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

98785 for me produces this chineſe character: 臡, but on non-unicode ſyſtems it would produce ß. The alt code for long-s is alt-0383 or alt-383, and only works on unicode ſytems. --Random832(tc21:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

You mean ſyſtems. Jake95_(talk!) 16:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

X-based ſyſtems

   AltGr+s or Compose, s, s

GNU Emacs

   C-x 8 " s

GNOME

   Ctrl-Shift-DF or (in GNOME verſions 2.15 and later) Ctrl-Shift-U, df 

200.230.213.152 22:33, 2 Nſvſmbſr 2006 (UTC)

Note the above are also all for ß, not ſ - Ctrl-Shift-17F for gnome in that case. --Random832(tc21:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I downloaded a program called DeKey which allowſ me to type umlautſ and other ligatureſ with uſe of the right Alt key in combination with a letter, much like the AltGr function on certain computerſ. Unfortunately it doeſn't seem to be able to replicate the long ſ..:Stirb Nicht Vor Mir:. 11:59, 8 Auguſt 2007 (UTC)

Þe X compoſe command gives ß. Þe correct command for ſ is

    compose, f, s

78.86.61.94 (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Why?

I certainly underſtand why the long s has fallen out of uſe, but could someone explain why it exiſted in the firſt place? Was there ſome typographical reaſon for having two different lowercaſe verſions of 's' but not other letters? --Birdhombre 16:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The long s was the original form of the letter in ſome handwritings, and the ſhort s was the variant. The ſhort variant was introduced becauſe it looked better uſed in ligatures and terminally. The long s ſeems to have fallen out of uſe as the elaborate handwritings did: by modern times handwritings had ſtarted to reſemble the ſhape of the letters alſo uſed in bookſetting (modern forms). There were certainly other letters with variant forms, such as the r rotunda, which alſo ſurvived to near-modern times. -- Jordi·✆ 17:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice comment, why is this not in the article? 68.103.144.192 (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention the early ſtyle of printing would abbreviate an n or m at the end of the word with a daſh over the laſt vowel, when the typographer felt like it, along with a variety of other ligatures and ſymbols.--Proſfilaes 18:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

True. Medieval and early modern handwriting uſed many abbreviations and ſpecial characters now no longer uſed. -- Jordi·✆ 18:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reſponſe. Theſe might be good to include in the article as well (or maybe it is and I juſt mißed it). --Birdhombre 23:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Moſt of the verifyable info is in the Hiſtory and Modern uſage ſections. One problem with theſe kind of characters is that it is hard to find print ſources of reaſons why it fell out of general uſe. -- Jordi·✆ 14:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I found it personally convenient to uſe it in my own handwriting. Writing an s has the feeling of ſtopping ſomething - writing an ſ where there is nothing ſtopped feels more natural and quicker. Not that that would prove anything ;-)

That ſaid, there are ſome - rare - occurrences where conſiſtent and correct uſe of the two s variants clears ambiguities. The ſchoolbook example in my native German is "Wachſtube" (watch room) vſ. "Wachstube" (wax tube).--2001:A60:15A3:2A01:ECAC:DD44:1B67:5A21 (talk) 01:52, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Further about ſ

Ðe letter ſ is ſweet! We ſhould use it more. Alſo, braſsſmith is correct. I þink it alſo makes the word "ſcrewed" look muć better. Wiþ a compoſe key on Linux, you can uſe Compoſ, f, s to get it.

Ðiſ iſ getting ſilly. toresbe 23:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Gettiŋ ſilly, you ſay? I ſay we revive ſome of ðeſe 'antique' letters, and (of courſe) briŋ ðe "eszett ("ß")" in from German. To me it's quite a preßiŋ ißue. I þink we need more letters!--Life in General (Talk) 22:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Breaking open templates

Let's not open templates onto the page in order to change their s's to the long-s. It makes it too hard to edit the templates and adds too much junk to the top of the page to make it worth it.--Prosfilaes 09:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Can this be moved to having ſ as the title?

I was under the impreſſion that lowercaſe letters were not a problem at the beginning of titles any more. Vitriol 16:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

It is ſupriſing that you have mentioned this as it is already mentioned under the ſubheading "Why not name this page %c5%bf ?". Of course they are are problem. Look at Ebay, IPod (and related articles), EMac, IBook, etc. If the problem was ſolved, then theſe articles would have been the firſt to be corrected, along with this one, ſurely? Jake95_(talk!) 17:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I apoligiſe for not looking harder at this page to find a ſubheading already suitable. However, I'm not ſure I underſtand the reſt of what you are ſaying. It ſeems like you're ſaying the mentioned articles are not fixed, when they are. Call me confuſed :/ Vitriol 20:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Quite unfortunately, those articleſ are only ſemi-fixed. That iſ, they pretend to be fixed when they really aren't. If you view the articleſ you'll ſee that yeſ indeed the titleſ appear to be lowercaſe, but the titleſ they are ſtored under are really uppercaſe. The lowercaſe title iſ ſome Cſſ magic or ſome ſuch, but the article itſelf really beginſ with a capital letter. Here'ſ a demonstration of the problem: [[ſ]] comes out to be ſ... which if you hover over leadſ to S, not ſ. Thuſ the ſ article cannot be created... which ſucks. --Cadby ^(talk) 00:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions) is the place for anſwers! --mordicai. 03:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

"Cſſ" — I haven't seen anything so amusing since BJAODN... 68.39.174.238 19:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Uſer:Remember the dot took out the "The correct title iſ..." meſſage that uſed to appear at the ſtart of the article, I find myſelf unable to decide whether that ſhould be the caſe or not. :-) I ſuppose I can ſee how it could make more ſenſe there if we were actually under the [[S]] title. Anyway, juſt thought I'd ſay about it in caſe. _{tiny plaſtic} Grey Knight ⊖ 17:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I just had to do it

I had ſome fun Stale Fries 03:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you talking about something like thiſ? ~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 23:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

alternate explanation

I remember reading ſomewhere that uſe of the long s was partially due to midieval printing -- the ſhort form S was ſuppoſedly more prone to breakage, ſo the long form was uſed for that reaſon. I can't remember where I picked that up, though, and I have yet to ſee a ſingle authoritative ſource that ſubſtantiates it. —Preceding unſigned comment added by 65.4.64.64 (talk) 04:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

No, it exiſted before movable-type printing was even invented. However, the practiſe of placing the period or comma inside the quote marks was ſtarted for this reason. —Random832 14:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Typeſetting only, or curſive?

Was the "long s" uſed only in printed materials ſuch as books and broadſheets, or was it alſo uſed in handwritten materials? Did Mr. Thos. Jefferſon, for inſtance, uſe it in his journals? Cactus Wren 19:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It existed in some handwriting styles. As for Jefferson's, you'd have to check his writing.--Prosfilaes 14:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

About two conſecutive "ſ"s

What do you do when two "ſ"s lie together? Like in the word "berrassaður". Would it be ſpelled "berraſsaður" or "berraſſaður"? And why? --BiT 04:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

This is what the German "double S ſign" was made for: It is your first verſion, but with the "ſs" ligatured into one character. As to the correctneſs, in German its ſtandardized, in Engliſh anything went. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 05:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

That ſeems to be the caſe, although the more learned Engliſh printers, and newſpapers ſuch as The Times, uſed ſſ in the middle of a word and ſs at the end. Jeſs Cully (talk) 23:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The ß was not invented for writing two ſ simply; that's where just ſſ would be used. The ß exiſts, and ſpecifically, to repreſent "ſs". I don't know the word "berrassaður", ſo I can't ſay for ſure, but it should be "berraſſaður". You write ſ in general, and s at the end of a word, or of a part of a compound word, or juſt generally when ſomething ends. So for adreſſing an envelope, it might be neceſſary to use an addreßbook.--2001:A60:15A3:2A01:ECAC:DD44:1B67:5A21 (talk) 01:56, 2 January 2015 (UTC)