Re: On the meaning of ``single-space'' inter-line spacing

[Michael Piotrowski]

On 2006-06-28 address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:

> Michael Piotrowski <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> AFAIK, these terms are typewriter (not typesetting) terminology: On a
>> mechanical typewriter you could typically select single-spaced,
>> space-and-a-half, or double-spaced.  Space-and-a-half was normally
>> used.  Single-spaced is in fact equivalent to 1.0fx, and thus *very*
>> tight.  Double-spaced, as typically required for manuscripts, "means a
>> full blank line (not a half-line) between all typed lines" [1] (and is
>> thus very wide).
>
> Thanks for your explanations.
>
> It turns out that I just read otherwise rather precise IEEE formatting
> instructions [0] that require ``single-spacing'' without providing
> further details.  Their example is not as tight as 1.0fx, rather
> something like 1.2fx it seems, so I think their use of the term
> ``single-spacing'' was inaccurate.

Well, it seems the spec is not quite as precise as it pretends to be:
For example, "True-Type 1 fonts are preferred." is nonsense.
Engineers shouldn't write things like "6-1/2 inches".  Do they really
want "Firstname Lastname" for article references and "Lastname,
Firstname" for book references!?  I could go on ;-)

Concerning the spacing, these instructions are typical for people with
a typewriter or word processor background; Microsoft Word probably has
a setting "single-spaced", too.  I agree that they probably really
mean "10 on 12", which is also suggested by the reference to "12-point
blank lines".

As an aside, due to the continued use of the body height (i.e., the
height of the--nowadays purely hypothetical--lead block on which the
letter sits) for measuring type instead of measurements which relate
to the *actual* appearance of the typeface (such as the caps height),
leading specifications are only valid for *one* specific typeface.
Different typefaces may have very different caps heights at the same
nominal type height: It's well known that Helvetica is much larger
than Times at the same nominal size.  This also applies to leading:
What may be fine for one typeface, may be too tight or too loose for
another.

Greetings

-- 
Michael Piotrowski, M.A.                               <address@hidden>
Public key at <http://www.dynalabs.de/mxp/pubkey.txt>