TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: space space From:Margaret Gerard <margaret%mailhost -at- TOSHIBA -dot- TIC -dot- OZ -dot- AU> Date:Wed, 11 May 1994 19:38:25 --1000
This discussion, taken with the recent lengthy and heated discussion on this
subject in framers -at- uunet has been *interesting* - heaps of opinion but no
facts backed by research. So here's some more, opinion that is.
Like Lavonna, I think the only important issue here is readability and no
research-backed info on its (space between sentences to be greater than space
between words) effect on reader comprehension has come to light. Here, we put
an en space after the full stop at the end each sentence. (This is achieved by
using a Frame macro as described in greater detail by Carol Odlum.) We do this
because we think it looks better and we think history is on our side. And, by
the way, no one here is older than 45, all bar me are software engineers, and
we have consensus on this issue.
Why do I think we have history on our side? During all the previous posts on:
- it was only needed on typewriters because they used monospaced fonts
and
- typesetters don't do it so it must be right, (red herrings both IMHO)
nobody pointed out that sentence demarcation (through spacing and sometimes
an illuminated capital) is evident in manuscripts which predate printing though
not in the very old which predate the sentence concept. (Talking from memory
sorry, I don't have any examples in front of me.) I have copies of my great
grandparent's copperplate script (about 1850) which shows extra spacing at the
end of the sentence. I have a brass rubbing of the text on an English tomb
which seems to show extra space although it is very worn. The two space
convention used in typewriting simply effected what was conventional in
contemporaneous handwriting. When I learnt cursive script in the 50s, I was
taught to make the space between sentences greater than the space between words.
(Back in those days, it was OK to care about aesthetics :>) but did we, in fact,
find text aesthetically pleasing because we found it easy to comprehend?)
I don't have an example of the output of Gutenberg's press but I think he did
not use monospaced type. It would be interesting to know what he did between
sentences:>) I have two books beside me: The 4th Edition of "A Treatise on
Applied Hydraulics" by Herbert Addison (Chapman & Hall Ltd.) published in 1956
and the "Radio Engineers Handbook" by Frederick Terman (McGraw-Hill) published
in 1943. Both appear to have been set by hand. Both use proportional fonts
and both use quite a long space between sentences (looks like an em at least).
As an aside, both use justified text in 10 - 11cm wide columns. Justified text
in columns of this width has fallen from favour because it has been *proven* to
reduce comprehensibility and writers seem to accept that. Many writers do not
want to discard the sentence spacing practice - perhaps common sense rearing
its ugly head?
IMHO, it is madness to say that a single space between sentences is correct
because that is what automatic typesetting, WP and DTP software does. I'm
with Mark Levinson who posted:
** I don't know how sophisticated today's typesetting machines get, but
I don't know of a word processor that implements any difference among
the three periods in a sentence like "That will be $5.98 please, Mr. Jones."
It would have to be a very complex test to achieve correct spacing after the
full stops in
"blah, blah Mrs. M. Gerard. Next sentence blah, blah, blah"
and that is a very simple example. We have full stops in all sorts of strings
here. Our tools don't do it because they can't, not because its correct.
Because we can't automate it, we should stop doing it? Bunkum!
The "rivers of white space" argument is also absolute rubbish IMHO. It is often
asserted but has never been proved to result from *sentence* spacing. It is
a word spacing problem caused by inappropriate size type for the column width
and justification in the column. Fiddle around with these variables and you'll
see it for yourself.
I've looked at a lot of different pieces of type while these dicussions have
proceeded, trying to see the other point of view but I can't. Extra spacing
between sentences gives text that is more readable and more elegant, it seems
to me (although other factors affect elegance). We are sticking with our
macro until a DTP with AI pops up :>)