This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ƒ/8 and be there → F/8 and be there – Destination for move is a redirect (with edits) to the original. Requesting a swap of destination (F/8 and be there) be the article, with old article Ƒ/8 and be there be a redirect to the new destination. The original article, with 'hooked Ƒ', even when lowercased with DISPLAYTITLE, is merely a stylistic decoration (implying or looking like a mathematical/formula "function" 'f'). The photographic notation "f/8", "F8", etc., is read as 'eff-eight', and the 'f' is just shorthand for "focal length". It's often displayed as a script-f ('𝑓', Unicode letter U+1D453, "Mathematical small f"), but that's just a stylistic display, equivalent to a LaTeX/math font for 'f'. The article uses 'Ƒ' (Unicode U+0191, "Latin Capital Letter F with Hook"), and lowercases it with 'ƒ' (U+0192, "Latin Small Letter F with Hook"). Additionally, at least two screen readers don't actually read the 'f with hook'. It's typographically, syntactically, and accessibility-wise, simply wrong. — sbb (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Warm Regards, ZI Jony(Talk)17:40, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't suggest that. While '𝑓' is stylistically nice, it's just style. The 'f'/'𝑓'/whatever is really just 'f' for "focal length". Compare to f-number. Most articles, blogs, etc., don't even bother with stylizing it anymore. Primarily I assume because it's just that: style. Several lens manufacturers use "F4" or whatever (capitalizing, not using a slash). I think that Wikipedia should try to specifically _reduce_ the emphasis on sort of "branding style" (c.f., "KoЯn", "Se7ven", etc.), and just go with the simplest lowest-common-denominator, which is just "f/8 and be there". Which is exactly what 99.9% of people would type if trying to convey that. — sbb (talk) 00:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to my previous comment, without DISPLAYSTYLE "correcting" the article title, "F/8..." is just as correct as "f/8...", whereas with '𝑓', there's no upper-case variant for it. It's only written as script-f because most historical typesetting used serif fonts, and it's referred to as a variable shorthand for 'focal length'. We don't call the denominator, which is N = f/D, ("8", in this case) '𝒩' (U+1D4A9, "Mathematical Script Capital N") because italic N suffices where N ({{mvar|N}}) isn't typographically available. Similarly with '𝒟' (U+1D49F, "Mathematical Script Capital D"). Let's not over- or misuse Unicode characters when we don't need to. Especially for article titles. — sbb (talk) 00:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for 3rd reply to you: also, at least testing with Apple (macOS, iOS) Voiceover, the '𝑓' you suggest isn't read by the screen reader. It just says "[tiny gap] /8 and be there ...". So from an accessibility standpoint, '𝑓' doesn't improve the situation at all. — sbb (talk) 01:02, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as long as we continue to lowercase the title with DISPLAYTITLE. f/8 is correct. F/8 is not. Note that the f-number template (f/8) does not use a Unicode hooked-f character. It's just an italic f with cascading styles that encourage the browser to display it in a font where the f descends. --Srleffler (talk) 05:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.