4 ms·

Calling ignorant what is indisputably taught in many places as standard syntax is pathetically pedantic. Honestly this is the first discussion of single vs do

Calling ignorant what is indisputably taught in many places as standard syntax is pathetically pedantic. Honestly this is the first discussion of single vs double spacing rules that I've encountered. It's been taught to me since grade school and will take more than a vitriolic Slate article to break that habit.

enraged_camel 13y ago
>>It's been taught to me since grade school A good habit to get into is always question what you are taught. And if the answer you are given is, "because that's the way it has always been done," then assume it is wrong. Literally the only argument for double spacing is that it provides semantic separation. Except we already have something that does that. It's called a period. So when you are using both a period and double spacing, you are being redundant.
- 001sky 13y ago
  A double space is Nx more area for a visual cue. N is at least 8 to 1.
  - gregors 13y ago
    Placing sentences on their own lines would even be better at offering visual cue.....oooh I see what you did there
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ledge 13y ago
  From the Slate article you posted: "Who says two spaces is wrong?" they wanted to know. Typographers, that's who. The people who study and design the typewritten word decided long ago that we should use one space, not two, between sentences. The only argument (which is apparently historically inaccurate according to the parent article) made against double-spacing is an appeal to authority and 'the way it's always been done', exactly what you are rallying against in your last reply. Besides, as has been pointed out already in this thread, a period followed by a single space (followed by a capitalized letter) does not solely occur in end-of-sentence contexts, so a period followed by two spaces does provide an added degree of semantic separation. Personally, I have no preference. You do what you like, I'll do what looks good to me. I am amazed that someone would assume that I was uneducated or ignorant (like the typographer interviewed in the Slate article), because I usually put two spaces after a sentence-ending period.
- Dylan16807 13y ago
  Does that mean you're against uppercasing the first letter of a sentence?
  - oneeyedpigeon 13y ago
    i'll take on that argument: yes. uppercase is more or less redundant and, hopefully, will one day be phased out. we're already seeing language move in that direction; even acronyms and abbreviations are often written lowercase nowadays. lots of things would be much more convenient, and we could do away with 2 or 3 keys and 26 characters.
- bmelton 13y ago
  > Literally the only argument for double spacing is that it provides semantic separation. "Mr. and Mrs. Jones went to St. Maarten, to see Mr. Jones, Jr. Ph.D., an M.D. who was studying further to get his D.D.S. from noted dentist, W.E.B. DuBois." Having had to do it before, I can tell you that I've yet to find a bullet-proof way to parse that sentence (programmatically) and guarantee that you weren't going to get random sentence parts. Assuming pristine data, I could just split on .<space><space> and be done with it.
- pradocchia 13y ago
  Did you even read the article?

enraged_camel 13y ago

>>It's been taught to me since grade school A good habit to get into is always question what you are taught. And if the answer you are given is, "because that's the way it has always been done," then assume it is wrong. Literally the only argument for double spacing is that it provides semantic separation. Except we already have something that does that. It's called a period. So when you are using both a period and double spacing, you are being redundant.

001sky 13y ago
A double space is Nx more area for a visual cue. N is at least 8 to 1.
- gregors 13y ago
  Placing sentences on their own lines would even be better at offering visual cue.....oooh I see what you did there
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ledge 13y ago
From the Slate article you posted: "Who says two spaces is wrong?" they wanted to know. Typographers, that's who. The people who study and design the typewritten word decided long ago that we should use one space, not two, between sentences. The only argument (which is apparently historically inaccurate according to the parent article) made against double-spacing is an appeal to authority and 'the way it's always been done', exactly what you are rallying against in your last reply. Besides, as has been pointed out already in this thread, a period followed by a single space (followed by a capitalized letter) does not solely occur in end-of-sentence contexts, so a period followed by two spaces does provide an added degree of semantic separation. Personally, I have no preference. You do what you like, I'll do what looks good to me. I am amazed that someone would assume that I was uneducated or ignorant (like the typographer interviewed in the Slate article), because I usually put two spaces after a sentence-ending period.
Dylan16807 13y ago
Does that mean you're against uppercasing the first letter of a sentence?
- oneeyedpigeon 13y ago
  i'll take on that argument: yes. uppercase is more or less redundant and, hopefully, will one day be phased out. we're already seeing language move in that direction; even acronyms and abbreviations are often written lowercase nowadays. lots of things would be much more convenient, and we could do away with 2 or 3 keys and 26 characters.
bmelton 13y ago
> Literally the only argument for double spacing is that it provides semantic separation. "Mr. and Mrs. Jones went to St. Maarten, to see Mr. Jones, Jr. Ph.D., an M.D. who was studying further to get his D.D.S. from noted dentist, W.E.B. DuBois." Having had to do it before, I can tell you that I've yet to find a bullet-proof way to parse that sentence (programmatically) and guarantee that you weren't going to get random sentence parts. Assuming pristine data, I could just split on .<space><space> and be done with it.
pradocchia 13y ago
Did you even read the article?