[Arlene]

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003 Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

[Yves Dhondt]

Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, check http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...310271033.aspx for
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

[Yves Dhondt]

Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, check http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...310271033.aspx for
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48*pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...



Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.-

[Peter T. Daniels]

I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48*pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...



Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.-

[Stefan Blom[_3_]]

Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)



"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...



Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.-

[Stefan Blom[_3_]]

Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)



"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...



Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.-

[Yves Dhondt]

Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message
...
Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)



"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...



Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.-

[Yves Dhondt]

Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message
...
Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)



"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...



Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.-

[Peter T. Daniels]

But the parameter they settled on is inexplicable. The traditional 10%
or so leading, the old "Single Space," which comes out to about
12/14.3, didn't present that kind of problem; it would arise if you
went for 12/12 in some fonts, or for fonts with small x-heights (such
as Garamond), not until you had negative leading -- such as 12/10.

One of the reasons I hate Knuth's "Computer Modern" (i.e., what you
get when you use LaTeX out of the box) is the far-too-great line-
spacing (though it's far from the only reason), and maybe some MS
engineer decided to imitate it. (Without consulting experts in
literacy, readability, etc.)

On May 17, 4:20*pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message

...



Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1..15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.--

[Peter T. Daniels]

But the parameter they settled on is inexplicable. The traditional 10%
or so leading, the old "Single Space," which comes out to about
12/14.3, didn't present that kind of problem; it would arise if you
went for 12/12 in some fonts, or for fonts with small x-heights (such
as Garamond), not until you had negative leading -- such as 12/10.

One of the reasons I hate Knuth's "Computer Modern" (i.e., what you
get when you use LaTeX out of the box) is the far-too-great line-
spacing (though it's far from the only reason), and maybe some MS
engineer decided to imitate it. (Without consulting experts in
literacy, readability, etc.)

On May 17, 4:20*pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message

...



Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1..15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.--

[Arlene]

I did some research on some Microsoft blog sites back when 2007 was released.
The blogs pointed out that there was indeed controversy over extra spacing
increasing readability and other dissatisfaction apparently prompted
Microsoft to add the Word 2003 Style Set as an optionin both Word 2007 and
now in Word 2010. Since they continued to include the Word 2003 Style Set in
Word 2010, I'm assuming Microsoft received enough requests from customers to
warrrant continuing the Word 2003 Style Set.

Yves, I'm interested in your comment about "creating empty paragraphs all
over the place and making automation always a tad more difficult." Are you
saying that Word files would be auotmated in some way by users or perhaps
converted to Web pages? Just wondering what you meant, and thanks again for
your input.

Arlene
"Yves Dhondt" wrote:

Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, check http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...310271033.aspx for
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

.

[Arlene]

I did some research on some Microsoft blog sites back when 2007 was released.
The blogs pointed out that there was indeed controversy over extra spacing
increasing readability and other dissatisfaction apparently prompted
Microsoft to add the Word 2003 Style Set as an optionin both Word 2007 and
now in Word 2010. Since they continued to include the Word 2003 Style Set in
Word 2010, I'm assuming Microsoft received enough requests from customers to
warrrant continuing the Word 2003 Style Set.

Yves, I'm interested in your comment about "creating empty paragraphs all
over the place and making automation always a tad more difficult." Are you
saying that Word files would be auotmated in some way by users or perhaps
converted to Web pages? Just wondering what you meant, and thanks again for
your input.

Arlene
"Yves Dhondt" wrote:

Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, check http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...310271033.aspx for
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

.

[Arlene]

I agree completely. It turns documents that would otherwise be 1 page long
into 2 pages for no apparent reason. Would you agree that the simplest
workaround is to either select the Word 2003 Style Set as the default; or if
you like the other styles in the Word 2007 or Word 2010 Style Set, keep it,
but for letters, reports, etc., press Ctrl + A and click the No Spacing style?

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:

But the parameter they settled on is inexplicable. The traditional 10%
or so leading, the old "Single Space," which comes out to about
12/14.3, didn't present that kind of problem; it would arise if you
went for 12/12 in some fonts, or for fonts with small x-heights (such
as Garamond), not until you had negative leading -- such as 12/10.

One of the reasons I hate Knuth's "Computer Modern" (i.e., what you
get when you use LaTeX out of the box) is the far-too-great line-
spacing (though it's far from the only reason), and maybe some MS
engineer decided to imitate it. (Without consulting experts in
literacy, readability, etc.)

On May 17, 4:20 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message

...



Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1..15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.--
.

[Arlene]

I agree completely. It turns documents that would otherwise be 1 page long
into 2 pages for no apparent reason. Would you agree that the simplest
workaround is to either select the Word 2003 Style Set as the default; or if
you like the other styles in the Word 2007 or Word 2010 Style Set, keep it,
but for letters, reports, etc., press Ctrl + A and click the No Spacing style?

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:

But the parameter they settled on is inexplicable. The traditional 10%
or so leading, the old "Single Space," which comes out to about
12/14.3, didn't present that kind of problem; it would arise if you
went for 12/12 in some fonts, or for fonts with small x-heights (such
as Garamond), not until you had negative leading -- such as 12/10.

One of the reasons I hate Knuth's "Computer Modern" (i.e., what you
get when you use LaTeX out of the box) is the far-too-great line-
spacing (though it's far from the only reason), and maybe some MS
engineer decided to imitate it. (Without consulting experts in
literacy, readability, etc.)

On May 17, 4:20 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message

...



Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1..15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.--
.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I don't use the Style Gallery at all, and I set my Normal style the
way I wanted it, so the problem never arises.

On May 18, 2:06*pm, Arlene wrote:
I agree completely. It turns documents that would otherwise be 1 page long
into 2 pages for no apparent reason. Would you agree that the simplest
workaround is to either select the Word 2003 Style Set as the default; or if
you like the other styles in the Word 2007 or Word 2010 Style Set, keep it,
but for letters, reports, etc., press Ctrl + A and click the No Spacing style?



"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
But the parameter they settled on is inexplicable. The traditional 10%
or so leading, the old "Single Space," which comes out to about
12/14.3, didn't present that kind of problem; it would arise if you
went for 12/12 in some fonts, or for fonts with small x-heights (such
as Garamond), not until you had negative leading -- such as 12/10.

One of the reasons I hate Knuth's "Computer Modern" (i.e., what you
get when you use LaTeX out of the box) is the far-too-great line-
spacing (though it's far from the only reason), and maybe some MS
engineer decided to imitate it. (Without consulting experts in
literacy, readability, etc.)

On May 17, 4:20 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message

...

Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1..15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.--

[Peter T. Daniels]

I don't use the Style Gallery at all, and I set my Normal style the
way I wanted it, so the problem never arises.

On May 18, 2:06*pm, Arlene wrote:
I agree completely. It turns documents that would otherwise be 1 page long
into 2 pages for no apparent reason. Would you agree that the simplest
workaround is to either select the Word 2003 Style Set as the default; or if
you like the other styles in the Word 2007 or Word 2010 Style Set, keep it,
but for letters, reports, etc., press Ctrl + A and click the No Spacing style?



"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
But the parameter they settled on is inexplicable. The traditional 10%
or so leading, the old "Single Space," which comes out to about
12/14.3, didn't present that kind of problem; it would arise if you
went for 12/12 in some fonts, or for fonts with small x-heights (such
as Garamond), not until you had negative leading -- such as 12/10.

One of the reasons I hate Knuth's "Computer Modern" (i.e., what you
get when you use LaTeX out of the box) is the far-too-great line-
spacing (though it's far from the only reason), and maybe some MS
engineer decided to imitate it. (Without consulting experts in
literacy, readability, etc.)

On May 17, 4:20 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Sometimes when I read a tightly spaced (in height) printed text it happens
that when I come to the end of a line and move my eyes back to read the next
line, I end up skipping a line or returning to the same line. This is
probably more an issue of me having one lazy eye, but I guess that a more
widely spaced text deminishes that problem.

Yves

"Stefan Blom" wrote in message

...

Indeed.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP
(Message posted via NNTP)

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...
I'd sure like to know where they got the idea that the excess line
spacing makes the text "easier to read" -- and also why they picked a
font that they think is "optimized for monitor display" -- especially
now that there are so many different kinds of displays in use --
rather than best for print on paper.

On May 17, 12:48 pm, "Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway,
checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition
of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message

...

Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set
in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1..15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.--

[Peter T. Daniels]

The people Yves is talking about are the ones who don't know how to
use a word processor -- and don't even turn on "Show Paragraph Marks"
so that they can see what they're doing to their files. Then they come
here and ask (for instance) why their printer is printing an extra
blank page at the end of their document!

Folks who make Web pages say that Word is a lousy tool for doing html.

On May 18, 1:56*pm, Arlene wrote:
I did some research on some Microsoft blog sites back when 2007 was released.
The blogs pointed out that there was indeed controversy over extra spacing
increasing readability and other dissatisfaction apparently prompted
Microsoft to add the Word 2003 Style Set as an optionin both Word 2007 and
now in Word 2010. Since they continued to include the Word 2003 Style Set in
Word 2010, I'm assuming Microsoft received enough requests from customers to
warrrant continuing the Word 2003 Style Set.

Yves, I'm interested in your comment about "creating empty paragraphs all
over the place and making automation always a tad more difficult." Are you
saying that Word files would be auotmated in some way by users or perhaps
converted to Web pages? Just wondering what you meant, and thanks again for
your input.

Arlene



"Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

[Peter T. Daniels]

The people Yves is talking about are the ones who don't know how to
use a word processor -- and don't even turn on "Show Paragraph Marks"
so that they can see what they're doing to their files. Then they come
here and ask (for instance) why their printer is printing an extra
blank page at the end of their document!

Folks who make Web pages say that Word is a lousy tool for doing html.

On May 18, 1:56*pm, Arlene wrote:
I did some research on some Microsoft blog sites back when 2007 was released.
The blogs pointed out that there was indeed controversy over extra spacing
increasing readability and other dissatisfaction apparently prompted
Microsoft to add the Word 2003 Style Set as an optionin both Word 2007 and
now in Word 2010. Since they continued to include the Word 2003 Style Set in
Word 2010, I'm assuming Microsoft received enough requests from customers to
warrrant continuing the Word 2003 Style Set.

Yves, I'm interested in your comment about "creating empty paragraphs all
over the place and making automation always a tad more difficult." Are you
saying that Word files would be auotmated in some way by users or perhaps
converted to Web pages? Just wondering what you meant, and thanks again for
your input.

Arlene



"Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.

[Arlene]

Gotcha--but wouldn't those same folks be very confused by the extra spacing
when they want to single space, such as in the inside address of a letter?
They would have to use Shift+Enter or use the No Spacing style. If Show/Hide
Paragraph Marks is too hard, they would probably go catatonic over the other
options. :-) Again, can't imagine what is gained by the extra spacing. Seems
to create more issues than it resolves.

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:

The people Yves is talking about are the ones who don't know how to
use a word processor -- and don't even turn on "Show Paragraph Marks"
so that they can see what they're doing to their files. Then they come
here and ask (for instance) why their printer is printing an extra
blank page at the end of their document!

Folks who make Web pages say that Word is a lousy tool for doing html.

On May 18, 1:56 pm, Arlene wrote:
I did some research on some Microsoft blog sites back when 2007 was released.
The blogs pointed out that there was indeed controversy over extra spacing
increasing readability and other dissatisfaction apparently prompted
Microsoft to add the Word 2003 Style Set as an optionin both Word 2007 and
now in Word 2010. Since they continued to include the Word 2003 Style Set in
Word 2010, I'm assuming Microsoft received enough requests from customers to
warrrant continuing the Word 2003 Style Set.

Yves, I'm interested in your comment about "creating empty paragraphs all
over the place and making automation always a tad more difficult." Are you
saying that Word files would be auotmated in some way by users or perhaps
converted to Web pages? Just wondering what you meant, and thanks again for
your input.

Arlene



"Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.
.

[Arlene]

Gotcha--but wouldn't those same folks be very confused by the extra spacing
when they want to single space, such as in the inside address of a letter?
They would have to use Shift+Enter or use the No Spacing style. If Show/Hide
Paragraph Marks is too hard, they would probably go catatonic over the other
options. :-) Again, can't imagine what is gained by the extra spacing. Seems
to create more issues than it resolves.

"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:

The people Yves is talking about are the ones who don't know how to
use a word processor -- and don't even turn on "Show Paragraph Marks"
so that they can see what they're doing to their files. Then they come
here and ask (for instance) why their printer is printing an extra
blank page at the end of their document!

Folks who make Web pages say that Word is a lousy tool for doing html.

On May 18, 1:56 pm, Arlene wrote:
I did some research on some Microsoft blog sites back when 2007 was released.
The blogs pointed out that there was indeed controversy over extra spacing
increasing readability and other dissatisfaction apparently prompted
Microsoft to add the Word 2003 Style Set as an optionin both Word 2007 and
now in Word 2010. Since they continued to include the Word 2003 Style Set in
Word 2010, I'm assuming Microsoft received enough requests from customers to
warrrant continuing the Word 2003 Style Set.

Yves, I'm interested in your comment about "creating empty paragraphs all
over the place and making automation always a tad more difficult." Are you
saying that Word files would be auotmated in some way by users or perhaps
converted to Web pages? Just wondering what you meant, and thanks again for
your input.

Arlene



"Yves Dhondt" wrote:
Where do you get the idea that "enough people are dissatisfied with it"?
Especially if you end your message with "and I suspect I'm not alone."

Anyway, checkhttp://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HA102310271033.aspxfor
an explaination.

I'm impartial towards the line height but I am a huge fan of the addition of
whitespace at the end of a paragraph. People just pressed enter too many
times creating empty paragraphs all over the place and making automation
always a tad more difficult.

Yves

"Arlene" wrote in message
...
Can someone explain why Microsoft opted to change the default style set in
Word 2007 and now in Word 2010 to include mutliple line spacing at 1.15
between lines and 10-pt. spacing after paragraphs? Evidently, enough
people
are dissatisfied with it that they also opted to continue the Word 2003
Style
Set as a style option. I greatly dislike the 2007/2010 Style Set and I
suspect I'm not alone.

Thanks in advance for any input.
.