Why you should never, ever use two spaces after a period

Post by apotheon » Fri, Jan 14, 2011, 7:40 PM UTC

barrkel wrote: post #121

When I see two spaces, especially in proportional text, I use it as evidence of the writer being a luddite or "past it". Only one piece of evidence, not conclusive. Probably most of its explanatory power comes from it being an indicator the user is old, educated in typing with a typewriter.

Post by nycticorax » Fri, Jan 14, 2011, 7:54 PM UTC

neilc wrote: post #122

burgerbrain wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of the computer programmers, they were most certainly correct. Is the author really so quick to condemn while not realizing that programming is almost always done with monospaced fonts? Anyway, I never have to worry about this these days anyway. Worrying about trivialities like this is what LaTeX is for ;)

Worrying about trivialities like this is what LaTeX is for ;) You still need to pay attention to this using LaTeX -- LaTeX will (usually) insert a wider-than-normal space after a period, which isn't always correct (e.g., "Mrs.", "etc.", and so forth). You can avoid this using "~".

Post by barrkel » Fri, Jan 14, 2011, 7:57 PM UTC

apotheon wrote: post #151

barrkel wrote: post #121

When I see two spaces, especially in proportional text, I use it as evidence of the writer being a luddite or "past it". Only one piece of evidence, not conclusive. Probably most of its explanatory power comes from it being an indicator the user is old, educated in typing with a typewriter.

. . . or a programmer, accustomed to using monospace fonts, who has learned to touch-type and hits the space bar twice as a matter of habit. When I see one space, I tend to suspect the writer is not a (very good, anyway) programmer, and is not particularly concerned with how text looks in reader software that uses monospace fonts -- and probably learned to type on a cellphone. I also expect to see such people spell "…

Post by apotheon » Fri, Jan 14, 2011, 8:01 PM UTC

isleyaardvark wrote: post #119

burgerbrain wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt your books display themselves in monospaced fonts. My technical literature more often than not does.

That's my point. Most books don't use monospaced fonts, which was the case given in the article for instances where you'd use two spaces. You don't often see monotype in emails you send, or word processors, or newspapers, or even (as pointed out earlier) in web pages. If you're writing a technical manual, then you may want to use two spaces, but really isn't that something that would be handled by the printer?

Post by isleyaardvark » Fri, Jan 14, 2011, 8:58 PM UTC

apotheon wrote: post #156

isleyaardvark wrote: post #78

If two spaces is right and one space is wrong, why is it that I just opened up a half dozen books and saw that they only use single spaces? If two spaces is better for readability, why can't I find books using two spaces?

It's cheaper to print a 310 page book than a 360 page book. That's why.