[Terry Farrell]

Surely back in the days when printing was achieved by placing mirror
characters onto a plate, there must have been a set of spaces for different
uses (following a comma, following quotation marks, following an end of
sentence stop, etc.). The typewriter had a limited availability of
characters, so the number of different spaces was sacrificed - hence the
need for a double space after the end-of-sentence stop.

Sometimes when I read my daily newspaper, I wish they would return to 'hot
metal' presses!

Terry Farrell

"CyberTaz" wrote in message
.. .
Exactly the point...

It wasn't until the introduction of the typewriter that the concept of "a"
space took on any finite dimension. The objective of "space between
sentences" is for the purpose of visual clarity, but the appropriate
amount
of space is subjectively predicated on what precedes & follows the space.
I
seriously doubt that '2 spaces' ever dripped from the tongue or even
crossed
the mind of Guttenberg.

As so often happens, laxity in communication is what has triggered this
seemingly unending but totally unfounded debate. My 'guess' is that the
actual original instruction was "Press the spacebar twice after a period."
because pressing the spacebar once often did not create a sufficient
amount
of space. The compensatory workaround for *increasing the amount of space*
became loosely translated into "type 2 spaces".

Logically there can't be "2 spaces" -- the size of the 1 space is either
more or less, narrower or wider. To accomplish the objective on a
typewriter
necessitates pressing the space bar a second time, whereas the precise
adjustment of that space is intrinsic to proportional fonts.

Regards |:)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac