Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Space before and after of punctuation marks
16 views
Skip to first unread message
Peter Percival
Mar 26, 2019, 2:52:52 PM3/26/19
to
It used to be that in printed works there was was more space after a
full stop than after a comma (even twice as much?), and that there was
space before a semicolon. I've not seen space before a semicolon in a
long time, and I don't miss it. But I quite like extra space after a
full stop. May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
--
"He who will not reason is a bigot;
he who cannot is a fool;
he who dares not is a slave."
- Sir William Drummond
full stop than after a comma (even twice as much?), and that there was
space before a semicolon. I've not seen space before a semicolon in a
long time, and I don't miss it. But I quite like extra space after a
full stop. May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
--
"He who will not reason is a bigot;
he who cannot is a fool;
he who dares not is a slave."
- Sir William Drummond
Anton Shepelev
Mar 26, 2019, 4:51:39 PM3/26/19
to
Peter Percival:
> It used to be that in printed works there was was
> more space after a full stop than after a comma
> (even twice as much?),
Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
which I process my messages. For printed works,
however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
> and that there was space before a semicolon.
Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
terform.
> I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
> time, and I don't miss it.
They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
1930s.
> But I quite like extra space after a full stop.
> May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
Wrong dichotomy. It is out-of-date, and you cer-
tainly may use it :-)
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
> It used to be that in printed works there was was
> more space after a full stop than after a comma
> (even twice as much?),
setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
which I process my messages. For printed works,
however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
> and that there was space before a semicolon.
able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
terform.
> I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
> time, and I don't miss it.
1930s.
> But I quite like extra space after a full stop.
> May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
tainly may use it :-)
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Mar 26, 2019, 5:18:35 PM3/26/19
to
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 18:52:51 +0000, Peter Percival
<peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>It used to be that in printed works there was was more space after a
>full stop than after a comma (even twice as much?), and that there was
>space before a semicolon. I've not seen space before a semicolon in a
>long time, and I don't miss it. But I quite like extra space after a
>full stop. May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
According to this it is out of date:
<peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>It used to be that in printed works there was was more space after a
>full stop than after a comma (even twice as much?), and that there was
>space before a semicolon. I've not seen space before a semicolon in a
>long time, and I don't miss it. But I quite like extra space after a
>full stop. May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
https://www.writing-skills.com/one-space-two-full-stop
<history of use, etc.>
...what’s the most common reaction readers have to double spaces
after full stops? Simply: ‘It seems old-fashioned.’ Many people
associate double spacing with a bygone era of clattering
typewriters. Others find it makes text look gappy and distracting.
And to some, defiantly typing two spaces comes across as pedantic.
After all, we live in an age where modern fonts and software are
designed for single spaces.
In contrast, single spaces make practically no impression on your
reader at all – they’re so common as to be invisible. They’re
unlikely to distract, so they won’t draw attention away from what
you’re writing. Unless your reader happens to be a hardcore
double-space campaigner, that is, but these are mercifully few in
number.
So, should you use a single or double space? We strongly recommend
just the one. It’s less likely to distract your reader from your
message, which is more likely to help you achieve your goal.
That was written five years ago.
I have distant memory of using a wordprocessor that could automatically
extend a space following a full stop. I don't think it was a double
space, more like one and a half.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.english.usage)
John Varela
Mar 26, 2019, 6:25:02 PM3/26/19
to
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 20:51:37 UTC, Anton Shepelev
<anto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Percival:
>
> > It used to be that in printed works there was was
> > more space after a full stop than after a comma
> > (even twice as much?),
>
> Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
> setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
> which I process my messages. For printed works,
> however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
>
> > and that there was space before a semicolon.
>
> Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
> able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
> terform.
>
> > I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
> > time, and I don't miss it.
>
> They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
> 1930s.
>
> > But I quite like extra space after a full stop.
> > May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
>
> Wrong dichotomy. It is out-of-date, and you cer-
> tainly may use it :-)
Within the last few months I read an article that reported that
<anto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Percival:
>
> > It used to be that in printed works there was was
> > more space after a full stop than after a comma
> > (even twice as much?),
>
> Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
> setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
> which I process my messages. For printed works,
> however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
>
> > and that there was space before a semicolon.
>
> Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
> able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
> terform.
>
> > I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
> > time, and I don't miss it.
>
> They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
> 1930s.
>
> > But I quite like extra space after a full stop.
> > May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
>
> Wrong dichotomy. It is out-of-date, and you cer-
> tainly may use it :-)
someone had done tests and found that, even with variable-width
type, people read faster when there is a two-space gap between
sentences than when there is only one space. I have therefore
reverted to inserting two spaces between sentences in all uses.
--
John Varela
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Mar 27, 2019, 9:51:37 AM3/27/19
to
On 2019-03-26 21:51:37 +0100, Anton Shepelev <anto...@gmail.com> said:
> Peter Percival:
>
>> It used to be that in printed works there was was
>> more space after a full stop than after a comma
>> (even twice as much?),
>
> Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
> setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
> which I process my messages. For printed works,
> however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
>
>> and that there was space before a semicolon.
>
> Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
> able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
> terform.
>
>> I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
>> time, and I don't miss it.
>
> They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
> 1930s.
And still standard in French typography. The space is obligatory before
> Peter Percival:
>
>> It used to be that in printed works there was was
>> more space after a full stop than after a comma
>> (even twice as much?),
>
> Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
> setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
> which I process my messages. For printed works,
> however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
>
>> and that there was space before a semicolon.
>
> Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
> able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
> terform.
>
>> I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
>> time, and I don't miss it.
>
> They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
> 1930s.
and after any punctuation character consisting of two bits: ; ?; !, :,
«, », “, ”
Don't ask the logic, because I don't know. Maybe there isn't any; it's
just what they do.
>
>> But I quite like extra space after a full stop.
>> May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
>
> Wrong dichotomy. It is out-of-date, and you cer-
> tainly may use it :-)
--
athel
>> But I quite like extra space after a full stop.
>> May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
>
> Wrong dichotomy. It is out-of-date, and you cer-
> tainly may use it :-)
--
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Mar 27, 2019, 11:05:46 AM3/27/19
to
On Wednesday, 27 March 2019 13:51:37 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2019-03-26 21:51:37 +0100, Anton Shepelev <anto...@gmail.com> said:
>
> > Peter Percival:
> >
> >> It used to be that in printed works there was was
> >> more space after a full stop than after a comma
> >> (even twice as much?),
> >
> > Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
> > setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
> > which I process my messages. For printed works,
> > however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
> >
> >> and that there was space before a semicolon.
> >
> > Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
> > able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
> > terform.
> >
> >> I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
> >> time, and I don't miss it.
> >
> > They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
> > 1930s.
>
> And still standard in French typography. The space is obligatory before
> and after any punctuation character consisting of two bits: ; ?; !, :,
> «, », “, ”
>
> Don't ask the logic, because I don't know. Maybe there isn't any; it's
> just what they do.
These conventions usually date from the days of setting type by
> On 2019-03-26 21:51:37 +0100, Anton Shepelev <anto...@gmail.com> said:
>
> > Peter Percival:
> >
> >> It used to be that in printed works there was was
> >> more space after a full stop than after a comma
> >> (even twice as much?),
> >
> > Yes, a double "sentence space" is still the default
> > setting in the GNU Troff typesetting system, with
> > which I process my messages. For printed works,
> > however, I prefer a one-and-a-half sentences space.
> >
> >> and that there was space before a semicolon.
> >
> > Yes, but it was short, unstretchable and unbreak-
> > able. Perhaps it was included in the semicolon let-
> > terform.
> >
> >> I've not seen space before a semicolon in a long
> >> time, and I don't miss it.
> >
> > They are abundand in well-typeset books from the
> > 1930s.
>
> And still standard in French typography. The space is obligatory before
> and after any punctuation character consisting of two bits: ; ?; !, :,
> «, », “, ”
>
> Don't ask the logic, because I don't know. Maybe there isn't any; it's
> just what they do.
hand when they conveyed some advantage in accuracy and ease of
achieving it.
Peter Percival
Mar 29, 2019, 2:42:16 PM3/29/19
to
Peter Percival
Mar 29, 2019, 2:58:32 PM3/29/19
to
Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 18:52:51 +0000, Peter Percival
> <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It used to be that in printed works there was was more space after a
>> full stop than after a comma (even twice as much?), and that there was
>> space before a semicolon. I've not seen space before a semicolon in a
>> long time, and I don't miss it. But I quite like extra space after a
>> full stop. May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
>
> According to this it is out of date:
> https://www.writing-skills.com/one-space-two-full-stop
>
> <history of use, etc.>
>
> ...what’s the most common reaction readers have to double spaces
> after full stops? Simply: ‘It seems old-fashioned.’ Many people
> associate double spacing with a bygone era of clattering
> typewriters. Others find it makes text look gappy and distracting.
> And to some, defiantly typing two spaces comes across as pedantic.
> After all, we live in an age where modern fonts and software are
> designed for single spaces.
I would take issue with that. (You don't mind do you?) Whether single
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 18:52:51 +0000, Peter Percival
> <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It used to be that in printed works there was was more space after a
>> full stop than after a comma (even twice as much?), and that there was
>> space before a semicolon. I've not seen space before a semicolon in a
>> long time, and I don't miss it. But I quite like extra space after a
>> full stop. May I use it, or is it utterly out of date?
>
> According to this it is out of date:
> https://www.writing-skills.com/one-space-two-full-stop
>
> <history of use, etc.>
>
> ...what’s the most common reaction readers have to double spaces
> after full stops? Simply: ‘It seems old-fashioned.’ Many people
> associate double spacing with a bygone era of clattering
> typewriters. Others find it makes text look gappy and distracting.
> And to some, defiantly typing two spaces comes across as pedantic.
> After all, we live in an age where modern fonts and software are
> designed for single spaces.
or double spaces are used shouldn't be determined by fonts. Rather, it
should be determined by other means and the fonts should accommodate
what is determined. As for software, that should be configurable so
that it may do what the person who paid for it wants. It should not do
only what the unimaginative spotty-faced Herbert who wrote it wants.
Said spotty-faced Herbert's life is probably controlled by what's
"trending" on Twitter or what "meme" has "gone viral". End of rant.
The bits in scare quotes are words I don't know the meaning of and don't
wish to be told. End of rant. Really this time. Honest.
> In contrast, single spaces make practically no impression on your
> reader at all – they’re so common as to be invisible. They’re
> unlikely to distract, so they won’t draw attention away from what
> you’re writing. Unless your reader happens to be a hardcore
> double-space campaigner, that is, but these are mercifully few in
> number.
>
> So, should you use a single or double space? We strongly recommend
> just the one. It’s less likely to distract your reader from your
> message, which is more likely to help you achieve your goal.
>
> That was written five years ago.
>
> I have distant memory of using a wordprocessor that could automatically
> extend a space following a full stop. I don't think it was a double
> space, more like one and a half.
>
--
Peter Percival
Mar 30, 2019, 1:35:27 PM3/30/19
to
Ordatious wrote:
It's yer Knuth, innit?
> I hate it
I'm not a fan myself, but it has been (I'm not sure if this is still so)
the only thing available for writing mathematics.
> , because it makes your job more difficult when you have to
> write exceptions for those extra characters, which are sometimes used and
> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
>
> Counting characters doesn't work properly without those exceptions, so
> things take longer to do, are more cumbersome, and so on.
>
> Outlaw it!
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:42:14 +0000, Peter Percival wrote:
>
>> TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure, but certainly more than
>> one.
>
> Yeah, and who wrote TeX? Could it be ...gasp... an American...?
>
>> TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure, but certainly more than
>> one.
>
It's yer Knuth, innit?
> I hate it
I'm not a fan myself, but it has been (I'm not sure if this is still so)
the only thing available for writing mathematics.
> , because it makes your job more difficult when you have to
> write exceptions for those extra characters, which are sometimes used and
> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
>
> Counting characters doesn't work properly without those exceptions, so
> things take longer to do, are more cumbersome, and so on.
>
> Outlaw it!
Anton Shepelev
Mar 30, 2019, 7:08:43 PM3/30/19
to
Ordatious to Peter Percival:
> > TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure,
> > but certainly more than one.
>
> I hate it, because it makes your job more diffi-
deactivate special sentence spacing if it is unde-
sired. But anyway, the writer's or typesetter's
convenience is of no importance from the reader's
viewpoint. I don't remebember the LaTeX algorithm
of sentence detection, but in *roff it is super ele-
gant and easy to use. It never caused me any grief.
> Counting characters doesn't work properly without
> those exceptions, so things take longer to do, are
> more cumbersome, and so on.
Not it *roff or LaTeX, where a typical document
source has no double spaces.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
> > TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure,
> > but certainly more than one.
>
> cult when you have to write exceptions for those
> extra characters, which are sometimes used and
> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
Is so well-designed a system as (La)TeX the user can
> extra characters, which are sometimes used and
> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
deactivate special sentence spacing if it is unde-
sired. But anyway, the writer's or typesetter's
convenience is of no importance from the reader's
viewpoint. I don't remebember the LaTeX algorithm
of sentence detection, but in *roff it is super ele-
gant and easy to use. It never caused me any grief.
> Counting characters doesn't work properly without
> those exceptions, so things take longer to do, are
> more cumbersome, and so on.
source has no double spaces.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Anton Shepelev
Mar 30, 2019, 7:30:53 PM3/30/19
to
Peter Percival:
> I'm not a fan myself, but it has been (I'm not
> sure if this is still so) the only thing available
> for writing mathematics.
The other one is *roff in its many flavours. Read
about its ???eqn' preprocessor in the 1978 article by
Brian Kernigan in person:
Typesetting Mathematics, User's Guide (Second Edition):
http://www.kohala.com/start/troff/v7man/eqn/eqn2e.ps
for it still works as advertised, or in the 2011 ar-
ticle by Ted Harding:
A Guide to Typesetting Mathematics using GNU eqn:
http://www.zen89632.zen.co.uk/Groff/Eqn/eqnguide.pdf
I have used GNU Troff and ???eqn' to typeset math of
what I should estimate as medium complexity and was
entirely satisfied with both the ergonomics of the
tool and the esthetics of the result. I have used
and liked LaTeX as well, but prefer GNU Troff for
its simplicity.
> I'm not a fan myself, but it has been (I'm not
> sure if this is still so) the only thing available
> for writing mathematics.
about its ???eqn' preprocessor in the 1978 article by
Brian Kernigan in person:
Typesetting Mathematics, User's Guide (Second Edition):
http://www.kohala.com/start/troff/v7man/eqn/eqn2e.ps
for it still works as advertised, or in the 2011 ar-
ticle by Ted Harding:
A Guide to Typesetting Mathematics using GNU eqn:
http://www.zen89632.zen.co.uk/Groff/Eqn/eqnguide.pdf
I have used GNU Troff and ???eqn' to typeset math of
what I should estimate as medium complexity and was
entirely satisfied with both the ergonomics of the
tool and the esthetics of the result. I have used
and liked LaTeX as well, but prefer GNU Troff for
its simplicity.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Mar 31, 2019, 6:40:46 AM3/31/19
to
On 2019-03-30 14:21:24 +0000, Ordatious said:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:42:14 +0000, Peter Percival wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:42:14 +0000, Peter Percival wrote:
>
>> TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure, but certainly more than
>> one.
>
>> one.
>
> Yeah, and who wrote TeX? Could it be ...gasp... an American...?
>
> I hate it, because it makes your job more difficult when you have to
>
> write exceptions for those extra characters, which are sometimes used and
> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
Use \frenchspacing in the preamble.
> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
>
> Counting characters doesn't work properly without those exceptions, so
> things take longer to do, are more cumbersome, and so on.
>
> Outlaw it!
> Counting characters doesn't work properly without those exceptions, so
> things take longer to do, are more cumbersome, and so on.
>
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Mar 31, 2019, 6:46:52 AM3/31/19
to
On 2019-03-30 17:35:26 +0000, Peter Percival said:
> Ordatious wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:42:14 +0000, Peter Percival wrote:
>>
>>> TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure, but certainly more than
>>> one.
>>
>> Yeah, and who wrote TeX? Could it be ...gasp... an American...?
>
> It's yer Knuth, innit?
>
>> I hate it
>
> I'm not a fan myself, but it has been (I'm not sure if this is still
> so) the only thing available for writing mathematics.
Probably now, yes, and things like Microsoft's equation editor are
> Ordatious wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:42:14 +0000, Peter Percival wrote:
>>
>>> TeX does! Two? One and a half? I'm not sure, but certainly more than
>>> one.
>>
>> Yeah, and who wrote TeX? Could it be ...gasp... an American...?
>
> It's yer Knuth, innit?
>
>> I hate it
>
> I'm not a fan myself, but it has been (I'm not sure if this is still
> so) the only thing available for writing mathematics.
horrible. However, in the early days of word processing on the
Macintosh, Expressionist did an excellent job of typesetting
mathematics, especially if used in conjunction with WriteNow, the best
word processor ever. (Expressionist was a front-end for TeX, but you
didn't need to know that.)
>> , because it makes your job more difficult when you have to
>> write exceptions for those extra characters, which are sometimes used and
>> sometimes not. In the same bloody text!
>>
>> Counting characters doesn't work properly without those exceptions, so
>> things take longer to do, are more cumbersome, and so on.
>>
>> Outlaw it!
--
0 new messages