PDA

View Full Version : Marking ellipses


Eric Ladner
06-05-2005, 08:56 PM
But whenever it gets close to matters typographic, it is wrong.

Ah, well, since you've brought that up, what do you think about ellipsis (elipses?)? Use the glyph designed as part of the typeface, or use three spaced periods, or three spaced periods + one, or ?

I think it's cool to know how to type an ellipsis character, but even Bringhurst isn't sure about this one.

Eight AM dentist appointment tomorrow (I schedule doctors early so there's less time for them to get off schedule); will check in as soon as I get home.

--Eric

Michael Rowley
06-07-2005, 01:42 PM
KT:

Picking up my memory of you last reply to me (I got it by e-mail, but it got deleted as a 'read' message):

The widths of spaces I quoted were taken from the 1983 (39th and last edition) of Hart's Rules, which have been published since 1893. They are given in the Rules as 96ths of an em, which replaced the 'Monotype 18-unit system', according to the preface. (Note that the '18-unit system' had nothing to do with divisions of an em.) The principal spaces were: thick space, 32 units (i.e. 32 96ths of an em); middle space, 24 units; thin space, 19 units.

I'm fairly sure that these nomenclature of these spaces comes from long tradition, though I have no evidence.

Apropos your statement that Joseph Moxon—according to Hartley—had written in his Mechanick Exercises (London, 1683) that a 'thin space' was em/7: I'd have to be sure that he meant a 'thin space' as understood today in England (probably for more than a century), not the 'thin space' as often understood in America, which was probably also an earlier meaning in England.

Dowding, a notable proponent of close spacing, in his Fine Points in the Spacing and Arrangement of Type (London, 1954), quotes Tschichold instructions to printers in 1948: 'All text composition should be as closely word-spaced as possible. As a rule, the spacing should be a middle space or the thickness of an i. I personally have some difficulty with that, because an i seems much less than a middle space to me: there you have some vindication of your preference for saying (for instance), the spacing should be em/4. (Incidentally, Dowding also says that em/5 is a thin space.)

On marks of omission ('ellipsis'): while Hart's Rules says for English that, 'To mark omittted words three points . . . (not asterisks) separated by normal space of the line are sufficient', it says for French that 'points de suspension' are three points close together (…), 'cast in one piece'; and they are not preceded by spaces.

ktinkel
06-07-2005, 03:57 PM
Picking up my memory … What a great message!

Now I need to collect myself, as this has been a perplexing day (the forum being down, the missing messages, my brain’s confusion). But I want to reply and shall.

Thanks.

ktinkel
06-18-2005, 08:35 AM
… what do you think about ellipsis (elipses?)?Time to get back to this.

I have been reading Ari Rafaeli’s Book Typography (http://www.oakknoll.com/results.php?search_val=rafaeli&search_fld=All&x=0&y=0), a new book from Oak Knoll Press. Rafaeli has an extended comment on ellipses, including this bit:

“… more often than not the three points are tapped out with word-spaces or fixed space (e.g. quarter-ems) put between them. This may look well or it may not look well depending on the available space of a given line. And depending also on whether other ellipses appear in nearby lines, for (if word-space is inserted) even the slightest variation of space between the points can be conspicuous.”

Michael Rowley
06-19-2005, 12:21 PM
KT:

for (if word-space is inserted) even the slightest variation of space between the points can be conspicuous

That would point to a middle space (em/4) being the best inter-point space, with the space of the line at each end. However, I should doubt if is often necessary to have omissions in successive lines, and only if the two sets of points of omission are vertically close to each other are small variations in spacing likely to be noticeable, let alone 'conspicuous'.

Ari Rafaeli’s book sounds interesting (though fairly dear), but is being sold in the UK only by the British Library. Perhaps you would let us know what you think of it.

ktinkel
06-19-2005, 12:55 PM
Ari Rafaeli’s book sounds interesting (though fairly dear), but is being sold in the UK only by the British Library. Perhaps you would let us know what you think of it.I shall, when I have finished it.

It is not fast reading (for me, anyway), because of his writing style and the design and layout (and size) of the book. I am slowly getting used to it, however.

Michael Rowley
06-19-2005, 02:07 PM
KT:

the design and layout (and size) of the book

I hadn't taken in the size of the book (8½ in × 11 in) at first, though I had noted the number of pages. Fair enough, you'll get two more days to do your critique.

ktinkel
06-19-2005, 04:12 PM
I hadn't taken in the size of the book (8½ in × 11 in) at first, though I had noted the number of pages. Fair enough, you'll get two more days to do your critique.Hah! You demanding rogue!

I can guarantee I will not be ready in two days. Perhaps a longish version of a week! :-)

Michael Rowley
06-20-2005, 07:15 AM
KT:

You demanding rogue!

What a mild epithet! I acknowledge that a critique in depth will take about a week. Do you know anything about the author?

ktinkel
06-20-2005, 08:48 AM
I acknowledge that a critique in depth will take about a week. Do you know anything about the author?Or longer! I don’t know a thing about him, except what peeks out from the text, and what is stated on the book cover:
Ari Rafaeli is a graphic artist and figurative painter who lives and works in Chicago. He took his first job in the printing trade in 1974.
What is odd about that is that his writing style and typographic prejudices and most of the references are typically British.

Michael Rowley
06-20-2005, 10:49 AM
KT:

What is odd about that is that his writing style and typographic prejudices and most of the references are typically British

If you go to the British Library site and search for 'Ari Rafaeli', you'll see a description of his book that is quite different from that of Oak Knoll's. It is clear that he examines the typography of books published by very reputable publishers, most of them in London. I suspect that Rafaeli is a graduate of the London College of Printing, and he possesses a UK passport.

I've ordered the book, so don't be too dismissive when you review it!

ktinkel
06-20-2005, 11:46 AM
I've ordered the book, so don't be too dismissive when you review it!We can do tag team reviews, then!

Here’s the link to the British Museum’s offering of the Rafaeli book (http://www.bl.uk/acatalog/Catalogue_ISBN_0712306935_443.html), in case anyone else is interested.

Michael Rowley
06-21-2005, 12:59 PM
KT:

We can do tag team reviews

I've already dropped the baton: ' "Book Typography" is temporarily out of stock', they've told me today. They accepted my money last night though!

ktinkel
06-21-2005, 01:11 PM
I've already dropped the baton: ' "Book Typography" is temporarily out of stock', they've told me today. They accepted my money last night though!Oh, dear. Maybe Amazon has it (could even be cheaper).

Michael Rowley
06-21-2005, 01:59 PM
KT:

Maybe Amazon has it

Amazon quoted 4–6 weeks, and the price was the same (£25 + p&p). But anyway, it's British Library that's got my money. Amazon doesn't charge until the book is dispatched though. I'm hoping only a stock problem is involved, for one often has to wait a long time if the book has to be reprinted.