"take time to learn" is a BS excuse from a readability point of view, unless you're talking about something very specific. Some things, yes, you learn. Some are just obviously hard. There's no reason for it being that different even from Kurrent
> What objective measurement did you use?
Similarity between letters (themselves across systems and others). Comparison with similar and preceding writing systems. All objective criteria and in most of them it fails miserably.
The people who used the writing took the time to learn it, so it's not a "BS excuse". Your comment derided the system on a general level. From your point of view it might not make sense to learn it, but not from the point of the historic users.
Once you learned it, you see that the similarity of letters is only superficial and you can distinguish them quite nicely, especially with context. You actually start to recognise patterns. And since the system gives you only very few ways to deviate, these patterns are surprisingly uniform across different authors. I haven't seen that with other cursive systems to this extent.
It becomes a bit harder though with writing from after the war, when people started to mix Latin into their Kurrent or Sütterlin.
> Your comment derided the system on a general level.
You're correct, I am deriding it because it is needlessly weird even compared with preceding writing system and there's no good reason for it. While this might have been weird "by accident", a system like that would not work (or be accepted) today.
Again, "you have to learn" is a bad excuse if there's no good justification. There's plenty to learn on the modern cursive system, but I don't have to learn what squiggles that look similar mean. There's no reason why t, d, e, c look like the way they look
"take time to learn" is a BS excuse from a readability point of view, unless you're talking about something very specific. Some things, yes, you learn. Some are just obviously hard. There's no reason for it being that different even from Kurrent
> What objective measurement did you use?
Similarity between letters (themselves across systems and others). Comparison with similar and preceding writing systems. All objective criteria and in most of them it fails miserably.
Ideally you want letters that are similar to the printed form but dissimilar to each other. https://bighack.org/font-accessibility-and-readability-the-b...