Image talk:Usher building v3.png
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Removed complaints by unregistered user
Dude, opinion of professional typographers on the merits of justified text versus left-aligned/ragged right is divided. You need to visit http://www.typohile.com
Put your view to them and get some feedback.
Justified setting is the defacto standard for books, and if the text not being justified is the only reason you think it's bad typesetting, you need to get around more. As if justified setting is the only worthwhile alignment or the only one worth illustrating. If I made another sample with flush right/ragged left setting would you complain about that because "it's not justified"?
We do have a justified text setting sample: Image:Oscar wilde english renaissance of art 2.png I've put it into Typography and replaced the usher building sample with it in Typesetting, if that's better for you.
No, this sample isn't a justified setting, it's an illustration of flush left/ragged right setting. Its used to illustrate flush left/ragged right in Typographic alignment, for example.
This sample is not meant to be a facsimile of a page from a book either. You made that assumption. Just because the text is from a literary source is no pretext for a new setting of it having to be if it were printed in a book. The picture caption does not specify any such thing.
It's just text typesetting, full stop. Not a page from a book. That's why it doesn't have a page number. There is only one paragraph because the extract from Edgar Allen Poe's original manuscript was written as one paragraph. Do I have to break his paragraph up into smaller paragraphs to please you? Haven't you come across a book with paragraphs that run for more than one page yet? They're not uncommon.
I think what you meant to say was, "I don't like this type sample because I have a preconcieved idea of the values it should have, and it isn't set as if it were in a book".
You said, "This rather seems to be a good example of text which *hasn't* had any typesetting."
Oh, I suppose extra leading and tracking don't count?
Come up with a better one before you complain.
Arbo talk 09:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
