394:
373:
706:. I'm not sure increasing use of spaced endashes can be attributed to typographer preference as much as the transition from traditional typesetting to DTP software and autocorrect/autoformatting settings. Personal observation so take it with a grain of salt (and obviously not citable), but I've found that knowledge of how and when to use endashes vs. emdashes vs. hyphens is pretty uncommon even among people who do DTP and layout as a profession (mostly speaking of trade publishing and marcom). â
251:
305:
284:
211:
862:
516:, welcome to Knowledge. One of the first lessons you will learn is that if you want anything done around here, you have to do it yourself! We are all volunteers. Normally you would update the article yourself but updating tables can be a little bit risky. So may I suggest draft some text to go in the article, put it here, then someone will show you how to add it. Thank you. --
242:
727:
I couldn't find a clever way to fix it, so I have (more or less) reverted to status quo ante. Given that there is a section on en-dash v em-dash â and it is flagged at the beginning of the section â I decided that it would be labouring the point. I should point out that my 'more or less' means that
684:
True, I should not have expressed it in
Wikivoice. I will rephrase it later today to make clear whose opinion it is. But just as a an OR observation: tightset emdashes were the norm in Victorian England; they are vanishingly rare today unless the publication has a substantial US market. Nobody made
472:
I understand the structure of the article, and I'm sure it's consistent with the structure of other articles describing each character. But I think this common usage should also be acknowledged.This may not be a "correct" usage, but it's a common and widespread. An encyclopedia should be descriptive
468:
The article refers to the dash character, which of course has a well-established meaning. But people often use the word dash to refer to the hyphen character. This has been true for a long time, and is even more widespread with the rise of the internet. (Example: "The web address is oak dash valley
747:
In typescript, a double hyphen (--) is often used for a long dash. Double hyphens in a typeset document are a sure sign that the type was set by a typist, not a typographer. A typographer will use an em dash, three-quarter em, or en dash, depending on context or personal style. The em dash is the
1120:
to point readers at this material but it is crazy to replicate it (in a variety of forms and detail) at each article about every symbol. It also seems probable that the whole thing has been technically obsoleted by autocorrect, which replaces a pair of hyphen-minuses with an mdash and a space
980:
Knowledge, including this article (§"See also"), uses en-dashes to define, elaborate on, and describe items in numbered and bulleted lists; however this article makes no reference to this use case. This use case should be addedâeither describing it or providing a link elsewhere that does.
748:
nineteenth-century standard, still prescribed in many editorial style books, but the em dash is too long for use with the best text faces. Like the oversized space between sentences, it belongs to the padded and corseted aesthetic of
Victorian typography.
934:
I had changed it to hyphens, but it got reverted (on 2019-08-21), and I disagree with the reasoning behind the reversion. Like, put a after each such hyphen if you want, but it's an example, so it should be shown as is, warts and all. IMHO, YMMV, etc.
883:
I understand it's
Knowledge policy to use en-dashes for coordinate terms, but in this sentence, it makes no sense to use en-dashes, since it's an example of places where hyphens are used instead. As such, this is is confusing to read:
1200:
841:
I propose changing the 5x column of the
Unicode table to include a "standard" letter as well. This would highlight the vertical position of the different forms of dash. An upper case M seems a suitable choice â as in
255:
1190:
473:
rather than prescriptive. I'm not suggesting diluting the detailed description. But the article deserves a separate section to describe this this common and widespread usage of dash referring to hyphen.
153:
1205:
355:
1154:
It doesn't contain anything (that I can recall) about how to do typesetting (or electronic equivalent)Â â nor would I expect that it would, for the same reasons as I've set out above. --
1047:
way around in
Knowledge, is surely justified. The phrase "it became common" introduces a legitimate historical claim that is defective in that no source is provided, but that calls for
892:
591:
the npov challenge was the description of spaced ndash as doing the job of emdash, implying that the latter is the correct or reference form. Maybe in the US it is but not elsewhere.
957:
It states that "New York-London flight" could be misconstrued as a New flight from York to London, and suggests the use of the phrase "New York-to-London". This phrasing has the
202:
555:
There is no required limit to descriptions of "how people or things use or do something", including detailed use of the numeric encoding of HTML that you find excessive.
562:
is "The way a statement is put together, particularly in matters of style and word choice." This covers nearly all uses of the en dash. Perhaps the sentence could read
551:
Describing to the reader how people or things use or do something is encyclopedic; instructing the reader in the imperative mood about how to use or do something is not.
1225:
444:
434:
147:
1215:
345:
79:
1185:
410:
1220:
1195:
547:
edit of yours as I cannot see that either WP:NPOV or WP:NOTGUIDE is violated. What of point of view do you think is advocated? And NOTGUIDE says
1051:, not for suppression of the claim. "It may also be possible ..." also requires elaboration but, again, editors may be be able to provide it.
1142:
801:
321:
85:
1210:
401:
378:
903:
615:
has deleted the material concerning the hex and decimal values. While I still think it unobjectionable, I'll let the deletion stand.
643:
566:
It is only when en dashes are used in setting off parenthetical expressions ââ such as this one â that they take spaces around them.
312:
289:
1180:
764:
690:
602:
521:
99:
30:
1008:. It is bogged down in the detail of different OSs, different keyboards, different keyboard mappings. How is it encyclopedic?
824:
104:
20:
918:
1031:
does discourage use of the imperative mood, but the imperative-mood use of the verb "see", present to help the reader find
74:
264:
44:
65:
409:-related subjects on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1000:
I have temporarily commented out the section "Typing the characters". As it stood, it is an egregious violation of
760:
686:
598:
538:
517:
210:
185:
168:
135:
221:
1067:
1048:
966:
674:
620:
574:
924:
908:
656:
499:
393:
372:
190:
109:
869:
851:
678:
1125:
940:
511:
495:
494:
Rendering dashes on computers has rows for major text editing systems. Please add a row for Google Docs
270:
1112:, etc. To give instructions on how to use Windows, iOS, Android, Linux to enter symbols is (IMO) just
936:
594:
The notguide challenge was to tell readers how to encode the hex or decimal values as HTML. Seriously?
558:
Also, your mention of "when en dashes are used in phrasing" is unnecessarily obscure. "Phrasing", per
129:
982:
241:
1063:
1028:
1001:
986:
962:
898:
722:
670:
616:
586:
570:
198:
194:
161:
55:
1060:. I am unfamiliar with his workâââperhaps it can be used to support more of the section's claims?
792:
320:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1117:
818:
728:
I have discarded the opening words that took unspaced em-dash as the starting point for analysis.
226:
125:
70:
641:, it is implied that the spaced en dash gives "clearer typography than 'set close' em-dashes."
1139:
1057:
798:
739:
648:
51:
663:
223:
175:
954:
New York-London flight under "En dash § relationships and connections" doesn't make sense:
490:
Please add a row for entering characters in Google Docs (ad maybe Sheets and
Presentations)
1113:
1077:
711:
1124:
Bringhurst is the touchstone reference for modern typography: you can borrow it via the
961:. Should we just use an example other than New York and forget the whole ambiguity bit?
685:
a rule that spaced endashes should be the new normal, typographers just preferred it. --
406:
1174:
1159:
1081:
1013:
1005:
659:, among other publishers, prefers the unspaced em dash. I am accordingly labeling as
612:
480:
141:
1133:
559:
733:
707:
317:
1097:
304:
283:
1155:
1109:
1009:
476:
316:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
1093:
1089:
1085:
996:
Suspended section "Typing the characters". Knowledge is not a manual.
913:
1105:
742:(a noted Canadian typographer) is rather emphatic on the subject:
652:
638:
225:
24:
1201:
Knowledge level-5 vital articles in
Society and social sciences
976:
Use of en-dashes for description of/elaboration on listed items
1101:
235:
227:
15:
738:
you are probably right about "the facts on the ground", but
632:
1163:
1071:
1017:
990:
970:
944:
872:
854:
768:
715:
694:
624:
606:
578:
525:
503:
484:
906:
use hyphens, not en dashes, in coordinate terms (such as
633:
Bringhurst's criticism of the em dash is only one opinion
1056:
The sentence beginning "It is common ..." is sourced to
1191:
Knowledge vital articles in
Society and social sciences
639:
Dash § Parenthetic and other uses at the sentence level
544:
160:
1206:
B-Class vital articles in
Society and social sciences
797:(third ed.). Hartley & Marks, Publishers. p. 80.
893:
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
405:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
655:makes quite clear, the matter is controversial;
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
745:
597:Your suggestion reads fine to me, go ahead. --
532:No obvious violation of WP:NPOV or WP:NOTGUIDE
174:
8:
1138:(third ed.). Seattle: Hartley & Marks.
1076:My concern is really that the section is a
367:
278:
464:The word "dash" is often used differently
783:
759:Hopefully this resolves the dispute. --
669:the claim that the en dash is clearer.
369:
280:
239:
1226:Low-importance Graphic design articles
1121:hyhen-minus space with a spaced ndash.
847:
843:
816:
7:
879:Example of hyphens used as en-dashes
419:Knowledge:WikiProject Graphic design
399:This article is within the scope of
310:This article is within the scope of
1216:High-importance Typography articles
1128:. I can't recommend it too highly.
422:Template:WikiProject Graphic design
269:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
14:
1135:The elements of typographic style
904:Dorland's medical reference works
794:The elements of typographic style
651:is cited in support. However, as
644:The Elements of Typographic Style
1186:Knowledge level-5 vital articles
860:
392:
371:
330:Knowledge:WikiProject Typography
303:
282:
249:
240:
209:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1221:B-Class Graphic design articles
868:No objections, so went ahead â
439:This article has been rated as
350:This article has been rated as
333:Template:WikiProject Typography
1196:B-Class level-5 vital articles
1:
1023:What am missing? I don't see
653:Dash § En dash versus em dash
526:00:33, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
504:19:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
485:17:31, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
413:and see a list of open tasks.
324:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
873:11:14, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
855:12:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
1211:B-Class Typography articles
1132:Bringhurst, Robert (2004).
1027:reference to specific OSs.
791:Bringhurst, Robert (2004).
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1242:
1164:21:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
1072:17:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
1018:14:07, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
945:17:33, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
823:: CS1 maint: url-status (
445:project's importance scale
402:WikiProject Graphic design
1116:. Yes, we should use the
991:16:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
919:CheyneâStokes respiration
769:14:26, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
716:12:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
695:12:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
679:02:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
625:22:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
607:21:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
579:17:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
438:
387:
349:
298:
277:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1049:Template:Citation needed
971:19:16, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
657:Oxford University Press
425:Graphic design articles
1181:B-Class vital articles
950:New York-London flight
756:
469:dash hotel dot com.")
313:WikiProject Typography
75:avoid personal attacks
761:John Maynard Friedman
687:John Maynard Friedman
599:John Maynard Friedman
539:John Maynard Friedman
518:John Maynard Friedman
256:level-5 vital article
203:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
560:Wikt:phrasing § Noun
105:No original research
925:KaplanâMeier method
909:bloodâbrain barrier
899:AMA Manual of Style
336:Typography articles
265:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1144:978-0-88179-206-5
1058:Robert Bringhurst
890:For example, the
870:GhostInTheMachine
852:GhostInTheMachine
803:978-0-88179-206-5
753:Robert Bringhurst
740:Robert Bringhurst
649:Robert Bringhurst
459:
458:
455:
454:
451:
450:
366:
365:
362:
361:
234:
233:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1233:
1148:
1046:
1044:
1043:
1040:
1037:
959:exact same issue
867:
864:
863:
829:
828:
822:
814:
812:
810:
788:
754:
737:
726:
668:
662:
590:
542:
515:
427:
426:
423:
420:
417:
396:
389:
388:
383:
375:
368:
356:importance scale
338:
337:
334:
331:
328:
307:
300:
299:
294:
286:
279:
262:
253:
252:
245:
244:
236:
228:
214:
213:
204:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1241:
1240:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1171:
1170:
1145:
1131:
1041:
1038:
1035:
1034:
1032:
998:
978:
952:
881:
865:
861:
839:
834:
833:
832:
815:
808:
806:
804:
790:
789:
785:
755:
752:
731:
720:
666:
660:
635:
584:
543:I am reverting
536:
534:
509:
496:Richard C Haven
492:
466:
424:
421:
418:
415:
414:
381:
352:High-importance
335:
332:
329:
326:
325:
293:Highâimportance
292:
263:on Knowledge's
260:
250:
230:
229:
224:
201:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1239:
1237:
1229:
1228:
1223:
1218:
1213:
1208:
1203:
1198:
1193:
1188:
1183:
1173:
1172:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1143:
1126:WP:WikiLibrary
1122:
1061:
1053:
1052:
997:
994:
977:
974:
963:EntirelyOnline
951:
948:
928:), and so on.
880:
877:
876:
875:
838:
835:
831:
830:
802:
782:
781:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
757:
750:
743:
729:
723:Peter M. Brown
698:
697:
634:
631:
630:
629:
628:
627:
595:
592:
587:Peter M. Brown
568:
567:
553:
552:
533:
530:
529:
528:
491:
488:
465:
462:
457:
456:
453:
452:
449:
448:
441:Low-importance
437:
431:
430:
428:
416:Graphic design
411:the discussion
407:graphic design
397:
385:
384:
382:Lowâimportance
379:Graphic design
376:
364:
363:
360:
359:
348:
342:
341:
339:
322:the discussion
308:
296:
295:
287:
275:
274:
268:
246:
232:
231:
222:
220:
219:
216:
215:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1238:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1217:
1214:
1212:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1194:
1192:
1189:
1187:
1184:
1182:
1179:
1178:
1176:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1153:
1146:
1141:
1137:
1136:
1130:
1129:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1082:Unicode input
1079:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1062:
1059:
1055:
1054:
1050:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
995:
993:
992:
988:
984:
975:
973:
972:
968:
964:
960:
955:
949:
947:
946:
942:
938:
932:
929:
927:
926:
921:
920:
915:
911:
910:
905:
901:
900:
895:
894:
888:
885:
878:
874:
871:
859:
858:
857:
856:
853:
849:
845:
836:
826:
820:
805:
800:
796:
795:
787:
784:
780:
770:
766:
762:
758:
749:
744:
741:
735:
730:
724:
719:
718:
717:
713:
709:
705:
702:
701:
700:
699:
696:
692:
688:
683:
682:
681:
680:
676:
672:
665:
658:
654:
650:
646:
645:
640:
626:
622:
618:
614:
610:
609:
608:
604:
600:
596:
593:
588:
583:
582:
581:
580:
576:
572:
565:
564:
563:
561:
556:
550:
549:
548:
546:
540:
531:
527:
523:
519:
513:
512:Richardchaven
508:
507:
506:
505:
501:
497:
489:
487:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
463:
461:
446:
442:
436:
433:
432:
429:
412:
408:
404:
403:
398:
395:
391:
390:
386:
380:
377:
374:
370:
357:
353:
347:
344:
343:
340:
323:
319:
315:
314:
309:
306:
302:
301:
297:
291:
288:
285:
281:
276:
272:
266:
258:
257:
247:
243:
238:
237:
218:
217:
212:
208:
200:
196:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1134:
1029:WP:NOTMANUAL
1024:
1002:WP:NOTMANUAL
999:
979:
958:
956:
953:
933:
930:
923:
917:
907:
897:
891:
889:
886:
882:
840:
807:. Retrieved
793:
786:
778:
746:
703:
642:
636:
569:
557:
554:
535:
493:
475:
471:
467:
460:
440:
400:
351:
311:
271:WikiProjects
254:
206:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1118:WP:See also
1064:Peter Brown
937:FuturSimple
809:10 November
671:Peter Brown
617:Peter Brown
571:Peter Brown
148:free images
31:not a forum
1175:Categories
779:References
327:Typography
318:Typography
290:Typography
1098:MsWindows
983:SMikutsky
916:(such as
819:cite book
259:is rated
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1114:WP:UNDUE
1110:ChromeOS
1078:wp:cfork
613:Macrakis
207:180Â days
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
914:eponyms
704:Comment
664:Dubious
443:on the
354:on the
261:B-class
154:WPÂ refs
142:scholar
1156:đđđ˝
1094:AZERTY
1090:QWERTZ
1086:QWERTY
1010:đđđ˝
1006:WP:DUE
912:), in
902:, and
896:, the
844:M-----
708:Carter
611:Done.
267:scale.
126:Google
1106:Linux
848:M____
734:Tcr25
248:This
191:Index
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1160:talk
1140:ISBN
1068:talk
1014:talk
1004:and
987:talk
967:talk
941:talk
846:vs.
825:link
811:2020
799:ISBN
765:talk
712:talk
691:talk
675:talk
621:talk
603:talk
575:talk
545:this
522:talk
500:talk
481:talk
346:High
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
25:Dash
1102:iOS
1080:of
1042:her
1036:his
1025:any
931:--
887:--
647:by
637:In
477:Omc
435:Low
176:TWL
1177::
1162:)
1108:,
1104:,
1100:,
1096:,
1092:,
1088:,
1084:,
1070:)
1016:)
989:)
969:)
943:)
922:,
850:â
837:5x
821:}}
817:{{
767:)
751:â
714:)
693:)
677:)
667:}}
661:{{
623:)
605:)
577:)
524:)
502:)
483:)
205::
197:,
193:,
156:)
54:;
1158:(
1149:.
1147:.
1066:(
1045:â
1039:/
1033:â
1012:(
985:(
965:(
939:(
866:Y
827:)
813:.
763:(
736::
732:@
725::
721:@
710:(
689:(
673:(
619:(
601:(
589::
585:@
573:(
541::
537:@
520:(
514::
510:@
498:(
479:(
447:.
358:.
273::
199:2
195:1
188::
172:¡
166:¡
158:¡
151:¡
145:¡
139:¡
133:¡
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
