|Coffeehouse||What would you ask the Tablet PC team?||57||Apr 23, 2004 at 3:55AM|
How well will Windows 7 work with existing metadata formats? I'm thinking specifically of the various forms of metadata for pictures. The support for image tags in Vista is extremely limited, though I really wish I could abandon Lightroom in favor of just natively managing my pictures and all their metadata directly within Explorer.
bill hill wrote: For proportionally-spaced fonts (that's what we call non-fixed-space) two spaces is ugly, and slows the flow.
So far, there have been several arguments for the legitimacy of double-spacing.
Some have claimed that "reading" that extra space takes extra time, but that can only be the case for someone who reads character by character, and I'll guarantee that 99% of the population does not read that way. The fastest readers don't even parse the text word by word, but rather in grammatical and structural chunks.
I'd like to hear an argument for single spacing more than "it's old and we don't have to do it anymore" or "I don't like it".
Besides, there's something wrong with the technology we're using, if it's not smart enough to render the text with the appropriate amount of whitespace between sentences regardless of how many consecutive <space> characters I type. Only the computer itself need be able to discern the difference between one space and two after a sentence ending mark.
I recently began using two spaces, again, after years of using one space. I switched because I found that Word's grammar checker can use two spaces to distinguish between a period in the middle of a sentence and a period that ends a sentence much better if I set it to two-space mode! I am trusting in the rendering engine to properly adjust the space to look nice to the reader.
In this situation, two spaces carries a semantic meaning that is different than one space.
P.S. When is someone going to figure out how to allow me to use ink to compose comments on web pages?