Re: DIV/CLASS: Mike Wexler: Re: HTML 3.2 -Reply

Jim Taylor (JHTaylor@videodiscovery.com)
Thu, 16 May 1996 19:31:04 -0800


Message-Id: <s19b8295.066@videodiscovery.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 19:31:04 -0800
From: Jim Taylor <JHTaylor@videodiscovery.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject:  Re: DIV/CLASS: Mike Wexler: Re: HTML 3.2 -Reply

>>> Abigail <abigail@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl> 05/16/96 07:49am >>>
You, Walter Ian Kaye wrote:
>++  ++ At 9:33a 05/16/96, Dave Raggett wrote:
>++  ++ Besides, it's generally known that justified text is harder to read
than
>++ raggett-..er, ragged right. ;)
>
>That explains that most books and packages like (La)TeX use justified
>text. Justified text might be harder to read when using non-strechable
>spaces, but I doubt it's true when using strechable spaces (combined
>with hyphenation).

Just for the record (and to drive this thread even further off topic :-),
studies have shown that there is no difference in readability between
ragged and justified text, *unless* the interword spacing is too great or
too uneven (which happens if full spaces are used instead of
microspaces and intraword spacing).

My guess is that most browsers would implement justification so poorly
as to lessen readability.

______________________________________________
Jim "The Frog" Taylor, Director of Information Technology
<mailto:jhtaylor@videodiscovery.com>
Videodiscovery, Inc. - Multimedia Education for Science and Math
Seattle, WA, 206-285-5400 <http://www.videodiscovery.com/vdyweb>