Last modified: 2005-06-25 by phil nelson
Keywords: documentation |
Links: FOTW homepage |
search |
disclaimer and copyright |
write us |
mirrors
I realize this is probably a pretty flexible and evolving issue. None the less - Are there rules, conventions that are generally accepted to describe a given flag? It seems that a Heraladic based set of rules and terminology is pretty archaic and not used in anything contemporary. The terminology seems too rarified for contemporary use. So...
For example, should a description always start with the flag shape, aspect ratio & size? Are 'they' stripes or bands? Do they separate or divide? Charges or blazons?
Now, I'm not suggesting, I'm asking. I'd like to know what the hypothetical
publication manual might say about how to handle this in, say, a scholarly
research article.
Mark Rogacki, 16 May 2005
I have a simple rule of thumb - 'what do I need to know in order to draw a flag accurately, and is what I have written readily understood?' I am open to correction here, but I do not believe that the order in which we place the required information actually matters, only that we use the recognized terminology for the relevant parts of a flag, and that we include all the necessary information?
There may be for example, a distinction between "stripes" and "bands" of which I am unaware, but to me they are interchangeable terms, In the case of a simple tricolour I need to know the sequence of colours, whether it is vertical, horizontal or diagonal, whether those stripes are of even width and the flag's proportions. Thus I might describe the National Flag of Italy as: "A green-white-red vertical tricolour of even stripes in proportions of 2:3, or the Civil/Naval Ensign of France as: "Ratio 2:3, a blue, white and red vertical tricolour with stripes in proportions of 30-33-37" (or in the case of this last when writing to the list "le tricolore for use at sea").