Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Re: bold text (was scriptingNews outline for 1/22/00)
Author: Nick Sweeney Posted: 1/30/2000; 2:19:11 PM Topic: scriptingNews outline for 1/22/00 Msg #: 14879 (In response to 14873) Prev/Next: 14878 / 14880
That's a matter of history, though, Phil: in the early 18th century, the common publishing style made much greater use of italics, boldface, small caps and the works. Which meant that each Noun received a capital Letter, as is the Case now in German; each Name or proper Noun was italicised, meaning that I would discuss the Writings of Dave Winer, Esq.; and Cross-references would often be given SMALL CAPS.(hence the last sentence.)
Most English publishers dropped the heavy punctuation around the 1730s, but American printers, often using older presses and basing their work on older texts, tended to maintain the heavier style. Hence Franklin.
My point: punctuation evolves to suit the context of the work, and the reading characteristics of the period. (Or is adapted to the writer's taste, as with Joyce's hatred of "perverted commas".) Italics don't work as well as bold-face on screen, because of anti-aliasing; capitalisation gives way to abbreviation; the old "rubric" style has been revived as the bright hyperlink.
In short, we shouldn't be worried about the niceties of typography so much as their impact upon the reader. Personally, I think there's a place for texts that are meant to be read, rather than skimmed. But as an Eng Lit graduate, I would say that, wouldn't I?
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:54:15 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.