I take it as a badge of honour to be called a type-spotter (Letters, DW 24 February). And Bill Wallsgrove ought to be honoured, too, to find that there are people still in the industry who can spot details that are off the straight and narrow.
In my letter, I did consider the possibility that there was a purpose in flipping the ‘V’ [in Dymov]. And I never suggested that the project was badly directed. In fact, I like the logo. I think the marque is elegant, and the lettering underneath appropriate in style.
When breaking the rules, it has to be done with thought and reason. Flipping a character simply for the sake of it is gratuitous and only incurs the wrath of type-spotters like myself. The execution of the design has to be perfect, as otherwise it will fall flat on its face. In this instance, the V looks accidental rather than deliberate. The letter falls backward and is not balanced to gel with the other characters.
The argument that the Latin version of the logo is hardly ever seen does not stand up. Either we do our job properly, or we may not bother at all.
I read the history lesson with interest. While it is true that William Caxton appeared to have used the letter U in place of V in his edition of Chaucer, it is not true that the Romans used the letter V only for numerations. A trip to the British Museum will confirm that.
In fact, the letter V goes as far back as the Etruscans (around AD 480). The letter U is a later addition to the Latin alphabet, as are the letters J, W and Z.
Managing director, design