In reply to ductus:
Hrant: I knew what was wrong with chirographic type way before I even took that one cheesy calligraphy course.
...
The problem is you're not necessarily putting the weight where the reading eye needs. And the more you rely on it the further you probably are from where you should be.
Hrant, I think you're begging the question -- indeed, have been begging it for years now -- by proceeding directly from identification of the constraining limits of the pen vis à vis edge to the assumption that this is 'wrong', the assumption that what the reading eye needs is different from the considerable range of modulation patterns and edge relationships that people have read around the globe for centuries, and the assumption that there is a proportional relationship between how closely type design follows writing and how far it is from that need. You say you don't need to prove anything 'even to yourself', but if you want people to follow your intuitions, you need to start providing at least some evidence to back up some of these assumptions, otherwise your arguments will quickly become an enclosed circle.
