RE: [Groff] RE: Short Orphan Lines

[Ted Harding]

On 29-Mar-04 Steve Izma wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 Ted Harding wrote:
>> I agree with you that "final formatting responsibility is shifted
>> from groff to the author". However, this is not altogether to be
>> ruled out; quite often, a nasty bit of formatting is mended by
>> slightly editing the text.
>> [...]
> 
> I think this is important: it implies the difficulty of
> automating the aesthetic aspects of typography.
> [...]

Thanks for the comments, Steve! You nicely expanded the thoughts
that underlay what I wrote, and the citations from Bringhurst are
interesting and entertaining. I also appreciate the remarks about
the behaviour of the "subconscious reading mind" since I agree
that this underlies the influence of typography on the reader.

Just as a musician playing from a score grasps note clusters as
a whole and does not have to decipher each dot, so the text reader's
subsconscious reacts to words or even phrases as a whole. Layout
affects this grasp, and one of the deeper subtleties of typography
is using it to provoke the desired rhythms in the reader's mind.

You may deliberately perform some typographic manoeuvre so as to
cause the reader to wonder what's going on just there, because you
want him to stop and think at that point--to disengage the autopilot
of the "subconscious reading mind". But if such a thing occurs by
accident because some computer program generated it, then the
reader has had an experience which the author did not intend.

For instance, while TeX usually produces very handsome output,
one of its tricks which (as a mathematician) I do not like is
the reduction of type size in fractions (one expression above
a horizontal rule above another expression) in in-line forumulae.
This is the same thing as eqn's "smallover". I'm used to the
good old traditional mathematical printing, where the "main line"
parts of an expression are expected to be in the same size as
the text. The drop in size in "smallover" brings me to a brief
mental halt and interrupts the evolution of the mental image.
For me, a drop in size triggers "subscript" or "superscript"
mode (along with the positioning, of course), and I have to
grab that distraction and put it aside.

I note that you write from the Wilfrid Laurier University Press,
Steve, so you may be able to confirm sonething which I have
wondered about.

Namely, when a book has been typeset and some nasty layout has
occurred in the result, which can be mended by minor changes to
the text, then if the author doesn't do it spontaneously it
seems to me that the editor would suggest to the author that
certain changes could be made in the text itself which would
improve the layout, and hence the pleasure and profit of reading
the book. I know that this can occur; what I've been wondering
is how prevalent it is as a routine editorial intervention.

Your commments on this would be welcome!

Best wishes to all,
Ted.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <address@hidden>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 167 1972
Date: 29-Mar-04                                       Time: 20:36:49
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------