Ya it looks nice but I think it can have improvement. All that empty space.. Simplicity is valued but I think it's a bit too simple
I'm more inclined to want to say "surhavas" since, by all the heraldry & similar stuff I've ever studied, figures go "on" fields not in them. I've never been clear if Esperanto follows the same rules of placement, or not.
Well, I'm not sure about English, but in Spanish you'd say in the flag "en la bandera" not on the flag " sobre la bandera"
Excellent point. In Spanish, there could be dust "sobre la bandera" but the motives depicted are "en la bandera".
Well in the Tips and Notes of this skill, it says "The most literal sense of a preposition is generally the correct word to use in Esperanto." So, technically, the star is literally sewn or drawn into the flag, so this is maybe why it is enhavas and not surhavas.
I don't know anything about heraldry, but I would never say 'in' a flag either, it's always 'on' a flag. Maybe this is a quirk of Esperanto?
In heraldry aren't they looking at the flag as a design, rather than the actual object on a flagpole? By that I mean during the designing of the flag one starts with a field of colour and then adds details onto that field, like the layers of a painting, one on top of the other. But when one puts the flag up a pole, the flag is everything, the material, the field and the specific design, it's all one package. A fly lands on this complete package call the flag, or a bird puts it's mark on the flag, but the flag itself only contains the original design, not the fly or bird droppings.
In English heraldry one typically starts describing a blazon with "on a field…" yes. National flags, at least in the European nations, started out as blazons.
But, as was said, this could be a quirk of English. The few book(s) I've been able to find on Heraldry in Esperanto (including this web page: http://www.bertin.biz/index.php?titre=priskriboDeBlazonoj.htm) suggest that the "On a field…" bit is superfluous and just start with the base color(s) and then "with" other objects, shapes, etc.
I've got an SCA† story about a new fighter with a blank shield that got a bird dropping on it. SCA Heralds are pretty much all noted for their attempts at humor. ("We don't pun, we Cant¶" being one example.) So his shield became On a field argent (white) a gules (circular shape), melting, purpure* (purple)
† Society for Creative Anachronism.
¶ Cant being an olde word meaning "word play"
Is it only me that screws up the pronouns all the time because of very ambiguous pronunciation? "Ni" and "mi" sound almost exactly alike unless I 100% put my ear to my speakers.