Re: unwrapa and space after period

[Judith Davidsen jdavidsen@xxxxxxxx]

Bill Troop wrote:
>
> You would have to search hard indeed to find any professional
> printing either before 1820 or after 1920 that did not have relatively
> small spaces between words and after sentences.

Bill--

Sorry, I couldn't resist the bait. Took me about ten minutes
to come up with a bunch of samples hanging around the house.

1. Tears of obituaries for a great-uncle, 1937: New York
Times used one space after period. Evening Sun used two.
Unidentified newspapers used two spaces after periods and
colons.

2. Scrapbook of strange clippings made during World War II:
unidentified publications, many typefaces and column widths,
indicating many different newspapers (all would have been
New York City). All use two spaces after periods and colons.

3. Richard Halliburton's Complete Book of Marvels, 1941,
Bobbs-Merrill: two spaces after all periods.

4. College newspaper, circa 1960, set in New York: two
spaces. College biology textbook: one space.

5. Intro to archy and mehitabel, 1928, Doubleday, Doran: one
space after periods, but then archy was a cockroach.

> Why is
> there not a single newspaper in the world that uses two spaces after
> punctuation -- even in their online editions?

This is not a good example, when you consider the number of
newspapers, including the biggest and the best, that don't
even seem to be edited anymore.

> there has been surprisingly
> little legibility research throughout the entire 20th century. Our
> legibility standards have essentially been set not by scientists but by the
> common sense of printers and typeface designers and manufacturers.
>
Unfortunately, art directors don't seem willing to settle
for the common sense of printers and typeface designers and
manufacturers. There was a letter to the Times earlier this
year that asked (I think this is a direct quote), "Are art
directors responsible to no one?"

Judith Davidsen