HOW MANY $@#!@ SPACES DO YOU ADD AFTER A PERIOD? - Page 3

Submit your creative works to Flashes >>HERE<< .

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: HOW MANY $@#!@ SPACES DO YOU ADD AFTER A PERIOD?

  1. #21
    When I'm rich and famous, I will have minions to delete the extra spaces.

  2. #22
    I had to break my habit of double spacing after a period when my English Comp I professor told me it was incorrect, and asked me why I did that. It was drilled into my head in typing class in the mid 90's. I have read a few times that double spacing was way before my time and it was odd that I learned it. My typing instructor was roughly 127 years old (I am assuming much younger but I was a teenager, everyone seemed old) and used an electric type writer while we learned on a Mac Plus. Double spacing "feels" right to me, and I often catch myself in the act and have to delete a space before carrying on.

  3. #23
    I started typing on a government-surplus Royal typewriter in the mid 70s (wrote my first short stories on that typewriter, way back in the 7th grade.)
    Then typing class in...79 I think.
    And they taught the 2 space rule then.
    It was hard to break the habit when I am on twitter.










    Wow. I still remember being awed the first time I used an IBM Selectric.
    I swear I could hear angels singing in the background.

  4. #24
    Single. Never heard of double, lol.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by moderan View Post
    Editors hate double spacing. In most software environments, you have to fix it by hand.
    Really? How quaintly behind the times, but isn't that just the publishing industry for you. If you really hate something then you learn how to kill it.

    Incidentally many systems just regard the spaces as "whitespace", as it's technically called, and present it as they prefer. Just to demonstrate I typed several spaces between these two sentences but the vBulletin editor reduced them to one to save space because that's its style regardless of our preferences. The modern approach is to regard content and presentation as separate subjects to be assessed and processed separately and whitespace in the content doesn't have a defined length as such unless one insists on it. In E-books many of the decisions about presentation can be left to the reader's E-reader as they are based on HTML, which also happens to work in terms of blocks of whitespace rather than individual spaces as characters, so, as has been mentioned, the issue is really just one in typesetting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Olly Buckle View Post
    Speaking of details, what on earth is $@#!@ in the thread title? I can think of four letter words that would fit, but a five letter one ? ...
    Well, it evidently requires dollars up front so must be a specifically American expletive, maybe an obscene amount of money. Is that extra space so expensive in the US then? I thought they had plenty of it. We've discussed ten cent words elsewhere so maybe these are "$5000 spaces". That would read as pretty obscene I think.
    Last edited by JustRob; March 20th, 2019 at 03:34 PM.
    'Sharing an experience creates a reality.' Create a new reality today.
    'There has to be some give and take.' If I can take my time I'm willing to give it.
    'The most difficult criticism that a writer has to comprehend is silence.' So speak up.

  6. #26
    Pontificating on some imagined modern approach aside, it's a matter of uniformity. The sentences and paragraphs in a book need to look the same. It's the editor's job to do that. Removing those extra spaces by hand takes time...and you have to go over the mss anyway, for spelling, grammar, and suchlike.
    Ebooks are NOT based on HTML. It isn't a matter of typesetting. Most are based on flavors of XML, which is a completely different kind of markup language, and writers use competing versions of software to generate their XML. Therefore an across-the-board approach isn't feasible. Using the home software's corrective features does not guarantee success -- one still has to eyeball the work.
    Hidden Content
    "From the moment I picked your book up until I laid it down, I was convulsed with laughter. Someday I intend reading it." - Groucho Marx

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by moderan View Post
    Pontificating on some imagined modern approach aside, it's a matter of uniformity. The sentences and paragraphs in a book need to look the same. It's the editor's job to do that. Removing those extra spaces by hand takes time...and you have to go over the mss anyway, for spelling, grammar, and suchlike.
    Ebooks are NOT based on HTML. It isn't a matter of typesetting. Most are based on flavors of XML, which is a completely different kind of markup language, and writers use competing versions of software to generate their XML. Therefore an across-the-board approach isn't feasible. Using the home software's corrective features does not guarantee success -- one still has to eyeball the work.
    Please let's not get into a techie hair splitting debate about HTML and XML. I've just unzipped an unprotected EPUB file and it contains .CSS style sheets and .HTML files containing the text. Each file marked as .HTML contains the <HTML> tag and ends with the </HTML> tag, so it's definitely HTML. However, nowadays the HTML file format is a subset of the XML file format, so indeed a flavour of XML as you state, so we are both right. That sample file was generated by a Word to EPUB conversion application from a document given to me by another member for beta reading, so none of my doing. In my previous post I was just stating what I know to be true by looking at the actual files, not expressing a questionable opinion as I admittedly more often do.

    I actually directly edit my own text in its native HTML to avoid nasty structural junk from normal text editors creeping in, but the example that I chose to check here wasn't mine. You can unzip an unprotected EPUB E-book, edit it with an HTML editor and then zip it back up again. It's basically web pages inside a zip file and that's all. Nowadays common text editors, even Word, are claimed to be XML compatible but the XML structure is so generic that there's a lot of application specific junk thrown in. E-books try much harder to be compatible; at least the open format ones do. Amazon are a law unto themselves as ever of course, so I keep clear of their proprietary file formats.

    Hopefully that's the techie hair-splitting stuff covered adequately. Pax.
    Last edited by JustRob; March 20th, 2019 at 07:52 PM.
    'Sharing an experience creates a reality.' Create a new reality today.
    'There has to be some give and take.' If I can take my time I'm willing to give it.
    'The most difficult criticism that a writer has to comprehend is silence.' So speak up.

  8. #28
    An eBook is essentially a web page in a zip file.
    XML isn't terribly different from html.

  9. #29
    It amazes me sometimes; "Do I hit the space bar once or twice?" and we are up to page three and almost thirty replies. I do believe there are people here could discuss which end of an egg to break
    Visit my website to read and connect to my 'soundcloud', where you can listen to stories songs and more
    Hidden Content

    A thread of links useful to writers wishing to learn
    Piglet's picks. Hidden Content

  10. #30
    They're completely different in intent and structure. Ask the W3, who oughta know:

    • XML was designed to carry data - with focus on what data is
    • HTML was designed to display data - with focus on how data looks

    HTML works with predefined tags like <p>, <h1>, <table>, etc.
    With XML, the author must define both the tags and the document structure.
    HTML defines how an object looks. CSS determines the structure.
    XML describes how it behaves.

    And with ebooks, we're talking about Amazon's proprietary file structure, because it is the single largest audience segment. Let's not be disingenuous, and let us not cherry-pick. Let us also stop arguing inconsequentialities.
    It isn't even a useful drift. You do this:


    • Choose “Find…”



    • In the Find field, type . followed by two spaces.



    • In the Replace field, type . followed one space.



    • Click Replace All. ...



    • Back in the Find field, type . ...



    • In the Replace field, type . ...



    • Click Replace All.



    • Look through the script.


    And you go through the ms to make sure.

    It's just due diligence. In the end, it's just doing the job right, regardless of the format of the manuscript. The Chicago Manual of Style recommends a single space. That's good enough for me.

    “The standard for composition [typesetting] such as that in the text of this book would be a 3-to-em space [a third of an em] . . . between words, after colons, after exclamation and interrogation points, and after periods ending sentences” (11th ed., p. . So “one space” is a relatively new convention for manuscripts but less new for published documents."
    Hidden Content
    "From the moment I picked your book up until I laid it down, I was convulsed with laughter. Someday I intend reading it." - Groucho Marx

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.