Re: [Groff] explicit hyphen and numbers

[Steve Izma]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 09:25:09AM -0400, address@hidden wrote:

> From: Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 07:39:19 +0200 (CEST)
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: [Groff] explicit hyphen and numbers
> 
> ...
> Since it isn't possible to set the hcode value for numbers, things
> like `200-400' are never hyphenated.  To force a break you have to
> insert a zero-width breakpoint: `200-\:400'.
> 
> I'll document this properly, but I wonder whether this behaviour
> should be changed.  For example, I could add a new `.cflags' value to
> ignore the surrounding hyphenation codes.  On the other hand, until
> now there has never been a complaint...

> From: Larry Kollar <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 8:37:08 -0400
> 
> Personally, I think that's a (good) feature. I'm sure someone will disagree. 
> :-)
> 
> -- Larry

> From: Keith Marshall <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:28:29 +0100
> 
> I won't!  If I write a numeric range, such as `200-400', I *don't* want a 
> line break to occur within it.

Well, I'll disagree. I can't find any reference to this in either
"Words into Type" or the "Chicago Guide ...", but when setting
indexes on short lines (e.g., two columns on book page, which
gives you about 10 to 12 picas, usually indented), any place
where you can get a line break is very important. By the way,
most style guides recommend using an en dash here, which is
subject to the same .hcode and .cflag issues as a hyphen. So I'm
keen on the idea of having another .cflag code to increase our
options in such situations.

Even in the middle of a regular text block, I don't think anyone
is going to confuse a range of numbers broken at the end of a
line with a hyphenated long number, which essentially is never
needed.

        -- Steve

-- 
Steve Izma
    Computing Systems Administrator       519-884-0710 ext. 6125
    Wilfrid Laurier University Press      FAX: 519-725-1399
    Waterloo, Ont., Canada N2L 3C5        address@hidden