Lan Barnes wrote:
On Sun, July 1, 2007 6:08 pm, James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
Lan Barnes wrote:
On Sun, July 1, 2007 4:24 pm, Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
"Lead" vs. "led" is illiteracy (it's actually reliance on spellchecking
rather than proofreading).
You wanna go crazy? In journalism the beginning of a story pronounced
"lead" (rhymes with BEAD) is spelled led.
I never understood (or liked) that.
Ya want more?
This sample google-hit agrees with my deep storage:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A896231
It has a section:
"""
Leading
Leading (it rhymes with 'heading', not 'pleading') is something that is
usually dealt with automatically by a typewriter or WP program, so you
might never even be consciously aware of it. A good WP program will,
however, allow you to adjust the leading. This can be very useful at
times, so it's good to know about it.
If you have ever tried to read anything where the lines were jammed up
tight against each other you will know how difficult and tiring that can
be. Leading is simply extra space between lines of type, to help the eye
move from the end of one line to the beginning of the next. In the old
days a typesetter would insert a thin strip of lead after each line of
type.
This is fun (I came from that world).
"Justified" in typesetting means flush on both column sides. "Right
justified" and "left justified" are abominations of computerese. The
correct terms are "flush right" and "flush left." Anything else displays
ignorance.
Now ask me why M$ spell checkers have destroyed good diction.
Only witches and wizards need *spell checkers*; the rest of us use
*spell/ing/ checkers. *And it should be "how", not "why": how have
Microsoft spelling checkers destroyed good diction?
--
James E. Henderson / WordJames / Am0 / Am Ouil
http://www.Am0.us
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
