The article makes clear that the orientation of the lettering has changed over time, which counts against the idea that what it is now necessarily reflects the original intent.
To me the evidence in the article still suggests that “hard correctness” is probably not historically appropriate…hand lettering is not a typeface.
That’s really where I am coming from — the perspective of historical architecture, historical architectural practice, and historical methods of delivering buildings.
In particular, today’s mythological Wright is not the 1908’s historical Wright on a commercial jobsite. And the contractual relationships of a 1908 construction project were not delineated like current construction projects.
And yet the article shows the original sketches Wright made for the building that show the asymmetrical H's with the bars aligned with the bars on the E's (i.e on the upper half) in virtually identical font to what was eventually installed.
I don't really see how you can come away with the conclusion that this suggests lack of intent; at most, it seems like you had already formed the opinion that there was no intent, and you didn't find the evidence to the contrary convincing enough that you were wrong. I don't think your take is necessarily wrong, but I don't think it's fair to characterize the evidence as suggesting what you're saying.
The US can't even zone a residential neighborhood without lawyers and special interests jamming things up for decades through endless impact studies and litigation.
A bit of quick searching reveals that Houston does have many building regulations, for example restrictions of hazardous enterprises. It’s just that the regulations aren’t quite as black and white as zoning laws.
If an organization doesn’t have the wherewithal to secure data with Windows, the problem is a lack of wherewithal. Linux is not a substitute for wherewithal.
And anyway there is no Linux distribution with the look and feel of Windows, nor a distribution that will take full advantage of Dell laptop hardware. Or to put it another way, Excel…
Don’t get me wrong, I use Linux on some of my personal machines and have nothing against it. But Windows is a better choice for most people and most organizations because the Windows ecosystem has lots of documentation, training, system integrators, and consultants. Linux has Archwiki…good luck.
In the abstract, I don't see an obvious practical advantage of 3d steganography over 2d because the tools for 2d (printers and cameras) are more readily accessible and the processes of creation and reading are faster...particularly reading.
There might be corner cases where 3d makes sense...but it is hard to compete with decals/stickers, and 2d steganography can also use color and saturation as additional data dimensions.
The advantage is much more durability. Hardier materials, and the print can lose an entire paper sheet's worth of mass/thickness, and still be readable.
Those properties sound beneficial in non-obvious corner cases.
In particular those when a sheet of paper’s thickness does not impact the required data density.
While storing data on a wear surface is desirable and necessary to system design.
And when conventional use of a engraved number as index to extended data is insufficient.
That it is not aesthetically obvious, suggests it was drawn that way and not a mistake. Good typography is subtle and bespoke typography even more so.
reply