Long s [14 January 2012]
Your page is well documented and very interesting. Thank you for creating the page on We Relate. There appears to be a minor problem with the transcriptions. Evidently the transcriber was unaware of the Long s and transcribed the Long s incorrectly as an f. This is a common error. For more information on the Long s see the page on Wikipedia . --Beth 18:55, 13 January 2012 (EST)
Dear Beth, thank you for your comments. Much appreciated.
I must however clarify that the trancriber (me) is well aware of the "long s" or ſ. I did not put an 'f' instead of an 's' in each instance. If you look closely, you will see that they are indeed long s's (no full horizontal bar). Look at the word: "firſt", which shows the 'f' with a full horizontal bar and the long s or ſ without. I chose to do this with the quotation for purely æsthetic reasons! Even the Wikipedia article, to which you made reference, states that its correct title is ſ. And only "appears incorrectly because of technical restrictions."
In my downloadable word document > Media:Hermann Friedrich DÖRRIEN & his wife, Agneta WOLTERS.doc, I have also used a gothic type face in some other instances for the same reason. I'm sure that neither of these have made those passages too difficult to read or understand. And I hope they have added an interesting (as well as historically accurate) 'touch' to the otherwise uniformly styled texts.--Robinca 12:05, 14 January 2012 (EST)
I am so sorry and I apologize. It is an interesting concept but difficult for me to distinguish the difference with the modern type without my magnifying glass, when the long s is followed by the letter t. Look forward to more of your articles. --Beth 16:36, 14 January 2012 (EST)