Line Space separation problem

[russcody]

In Word X, using format/paragraph/indents and spacing, settings are
single-space and zero points before and after. With these settings, and
an 8 pt. font setting, I could get tight, tight paragraphs; lines
almost touching each other.
In Word 2004, using the exact same settings, Lines are 1/3 to 1/2 the
height of the font away from each other. I've tried manipulating the
Compatibility Preferences with, seemingly, no change. I've even copied
and pasted tight lines from Word X generated paragraph into the Word
2004 document, and lines lose their tightness and separate away from
each other upon pasting. The ONLY difference that I can see is that the
Word X document used "New York" font, which is not available anymore.
Also, this text is inside a text box in both instances.
I know that in some graphics programs their is a feature where line
spacing can be manipulated almost infinitely. I assume this is not the
case with Word?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. A Mermen CD is awaiting it's
Jewel cover and the future of my CD Word design looks grim.

G4/800 10.3.8 Word 11.1.1

Thanks
Arcody

 

[Clive Huggan]

Hello Russ,

New York was a font designed for use on dot matrix printers in the early
days of the Mac, before laser printers were commonly available. It had very
different design criteria prompted by the spacing of the dot hammers. The
font does not suit most of our purposes nowadays. Times is the nearest
equivalent up to and including Word X (including OS 9 and earlier). But
things changed *radically* in Word 2004. Here's an extract from notes of
mine:

This is what Microsoft says about font compatibility in Word 2004: "The
fonts that are installed by default with Office for Mac are also installed
with Windows versions of Office. So it¹s a safe bet that when you choose
from these fonts, other people will see the same fonts that you see. You can
choose the following fonts with confidence: Arial, Arial Black, Century
Gothic, Comic Sans MS, Copperplate Gothic Bold, Copperplate Gothic Light,
Curlz MT, Edwardian Script ITC, Impact, Lucida Handwriting, Monotype Sorts,
Tahoma, Times New Roman, Verdana, and Wingdings." [Note: Courier New is now
absent]

A radical change has occurred with screen display and fonts in Word 2004.
Unicode fonts are able to display for the first time, and cross-platform
compatibility has greatly improved.

The first thing I observed in Word 2004 was that it uses Times New Roman as
the default font. Now, when a document in Times New Roman goes to Word 2003
on a PC, no font substitution is needed and the document should appear the
same. (If a PC has to open a Mac Word document containing Times ‹ a Mac
font, still included in the suite of fonts for Word 2004 ‹ the PC will
automatically substitute Times New Roman, which takes up different space and
will therefore paginate differently.)

You do not have to use the default font in Word, but unless you set your
Normal template to be something else, in Word 2004 the default font will be
Times New Roman rather than Times.

Times New Roman looks much better when displayed in Word 2004 than it did in
Word 2001, and Times looks much worse, so it makes sense to change over.
Times New Roman is better-looking when printed, too.

The improvements in Word 2004 go far beyond the fonts. Microsoft changed the
way text is laid out on the page to match the way Word 2003 on the PC lays
out its text. The text layout engine has changed significantly (it was
QuickDraw; now it's the Apple text layout for Unicode, called ATSUI) to
accommodate the range of Unicode characters previously unavailable on the
Mac, of which Times New Roman is one, along with Verdana, Trebuchet MS, and
one of the Asian fonts.

If you're still reading down this far: try your text out in Times New Roman
(or another font) and adjust it to your needs without any expectation of
retaining useful spacing etc from New York "as was". ;-)

And yes, you can specify "Exactly" as your line spacing in the Paragraph
command (Command-Option-m).

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is at least 7 hours different from the US and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
============================================================

* A SUGGESTION ‹ WAIT FOR CONSIDERED ADVICE: If you post a question, keep
re-visiting the newsgroup for several days after the first response comes
in. Sometimes it takes a few responses before the best or complete solution
is proposed; sometimes you'll be asked for further information so that a
better answer can be provided. Good tips about getting the best out of
posting are at http://word.mvps.org/FindHelp/Posting.htm (if you use Safari
and it gives you a blank page the first time, you may need to hit the
circular arrow icon -- "Reload the current page" -- a few times).

* AND ONE MORE ‹ AVOID SPAM: To avoid spam directed at contributors of
newsgroups, you can set up a "send-only" dummy e-mail account. Full
instructions are at http://www.entourage.mvps.org/tips/tip019.html

============================================================

 

[russcody]

Hello Clive,

Thank you so much for your help. Yes, I was still reading down "this
far" and, I must say that I was very much interested. It showed me that
it wasn't the font that was to blame as "tightness" remained in the old
document no matter what font I used; I mentioned "New York" since that
was the exact font used in the doc. Actually, it was the mention of
"Exactly" in the last section that cleared it all up; I had pulled down
that darn little tab with the different values but, had seen "single",
"1.5", and "double" and had dismissed the last 3 values, subconciously,
as just being larger than the last 3 instead of more refined. I skimmed
instead of read. That was the missing bit. All tightened up nicely,
thank you.

I also was not aware of the cross-platform fonts with Windows Word. I
will need this list as I use Windows at work and often have to work on
the same project at both machines and have seen how things can change.
I believe this tidbit will come in handy.

Cheers,
Russell

Hello Russ,

New York was a font designed for use on dot matrix printers in the early
days of the Mac, before laser printers were commonly available. It had very
different design criteria prompted by the spacing of the dot hammers. The
font does not suit most of our purposes nowadays. Times is the nearest
equivalent up to and including Word X (including OS 9 and earlier). But
things changed *radically* in Word 2004. Here's an extract from notes of
mine:

This is what Microsoft says about font compatibility in Word 2004: "The
fonts that are installed by default with Office for Mac are also installed
with Windows versions of Office. So it¹s a safe bet that when you choose
from these fonts, other people will see the same fonts that you see. You can
choose the following fonts with confidence: Arial, Arial Black, Century
Gothic, Comic Sans MS, Copperplate Gothic Bold, Copperplate Gothic Light,
Curlz MT, Edwardian Script ITC, Impact, Lucida Handwriting, Monotype Sorts,
Tahoma, Times New Roman, Verdana, and Wingdings." [Note: Courier New is now
absent]

A radical change has occurred with screen display and fonts in Word 2004.
Unicode fonts are able to display for the first time, and cross-platform
compatibility has greatly improved.

The first thing I observed in Word 2004 was that it uses Times New Roman as
the default font. Now, when a document in Times New Roman goes to Word 2003
on a PC, no font substitution is needed and the document should appear the
same. (If a PC has to open a Mac Word document containing Times ‹ a Mac
font, still included in the suite of fonts for Word 2004 ‹ the PC will
automatically substitute Times New Roman, which takes up different space and
will therefore paginate differently.)

You do not have to use the default font in Word, but unless you set your
Normal template to be something else, in Word 2004 the default font will be
Times New Roman rather than Times.

Times New Roman looks much better when displayed in Word 2004 than it did in
Word 2001, and Times looks much worse, so it makes sense to change over.
Times New Roman is better-looking when printed, too.

The improvements in Word 2004 go far beyond the fonts. Microsoft changed the
way text is laid out on the page to match the way Word 2003 on the PC lays
out its text. The text layout engine has changed significantly (it was
QuickDraw; now it's the Apple text layout for Unicode, called ATSUI) to
accommodate the range of Unicode characters previously unavailable on the
Mac, of which Times New Roman is one, along with Verdana, Trebuchet MS, and
one of the Asian fonts.

If you're still reading down this far: try your text out in Times New Roman
(or another font) and adjust it to your needs without any expectation of
retaining useful spacing etc from New York "as was". ;-)

And yes, you can specify "Exactly" as your line spacing in the Paragraph
command (Command-Option-m).

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is at least 7 hours different from the US and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
============================================================

* A SUGGESTION ‹ WAIT FOR CONSIDERED ADVICE: If you post a question, keep
re-visiting the newsgroup for several days after the first response comes
in. Sometimes it takes a few responses before the best or complete solution
is proposed; sometimes you'll be asked for further information so that a
better answer can be provided. Good tips about getting the best out of
posting are at http://word.mvps.org/FindHelp/Posting.htm (if you use Safari
and it gives you a blank page the first time, you may need to hit the
circular arrow icon -- "Reload the current page" -- a few times).

* AND ONE MORE ‹ AVOID SPAM: To avoid spam directed at contributors of
newsgroups, you can set up a "send-only" dummy e-mail account. Full
instructions are at http://www.entourage.mvps.org/tips/tip019.html

============================================================

In Word X, using format/paragraph/indents and spacing, settings are
single-space and zero points before and after. With these settings, and
an 8 pt. font setting, I could get tight, tight paragraphs; lines
almost touching each other.
In Word 2004, using the exact same settings, Lines are 1/3 to 1/2 the
height of the font away from each other. I've tried manipulating the
Compatibility Preferences with, seemingly, no change. I've even copied
and pasted tight lines from Word X generated paragraph into the Word
2004 document, and lines lose their tightness and separate away from
each other upon pasting. The ONLY difference that I can see is that the
Word X document used "New York" font, which is not available anymore.
Also, this text is inside a text box in both instances.
I know that in some graphics programs their is a feature where line
spacing can be manipulated almost infinitely. I assume this is not the
case with Word?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. A Mermen CD is awaiting it's
Jewel cover and the future of my CD Word design looks grim.

G4/800 10.3.8 Word 11.1.1

Thanks
Arcody

 

[Clive Huggan]

Thanks Russell -- it's good to get feedback like that.

A couple of things, then:

1. I *do* have vague recollections of the hazards of selecting "Exactly",
but I can't remember what, since I don't use the setting ("At least" gives
me what I want, since most of my work ends up in Quark XPress by a graphic
designer, or is PDf'd). But if yours is only a small item it should not be
a problem. If you think it may come up in other contexts, post back and I
think Daiya may be able to help, or John McGhie.

2. If you do lots of cross-platform work, look up appendix A in the notes
on the way I use Word for the Mac, titled "Bend Word to Your Will", which
are available as a free download from the Word MVPs' website
(http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/Bend/BendWord.htm). Also do a Find command
for "PC".

[Note: The "Bend Word to Your Will" document is designed to be used
electronically and most subjects are self-contained dictionary-style
entries. Be sure to read the front end if you want to use it further, so you
can use the document to best advantage and select the right settings for
reading it.]

If you are using Word 2004, wait a week or so before downloading it -- a new
version, with a lot of coverage of Word 2004, is imminent. I'll make an
announcement on this newsgroup when it's available.

Cheers,
Clive
=======

Hello Clive,

Thank you so much for your help. Yes, I was still reading down "this
far" and, I must say that I was very much interested. It showed me that
it wasn't the font that was to blame as "tightness" remained in the old
document no matter what font I used; I mentioned "New York" since that
was the exact font used in the doc. Actually, it was the mention of
"Exactly" in the last section that cleared it all up; I had pulled down
that darn little tab with the different values but, had seen "single",
"1.5", and "double" and had dismissed the last 3 values, subconciously,
as just being larger than the last 3 instead of more refined. I skimmed
instead of read. That was the missing bit. All tightened up nicely,
thank you.

I also was not aware of the cross-platform fonts with Windows Word. I
will need this list as I use Windows at work and often have to work on
the same project at both machines and have seen how things can change.
I believe this tidbit will come in handy.

Cheers,
Russell

Hello Russ,

New York was a font designed for use on dot matrix printers in the early
days of the Mac, before laser printers were commonly available. It had very
different design criteria prompted by the spacing of the dot hammers. The
font does not suit most of our purposes nowadays. Times is the nearest
equivalent up to and including Word X (including OS 9 and earlier). But
things changed *radically* in Word 2004. Here's an extract from notes of
mine:

This is what Microsoft says about font compatibility in Word 2004: "The
fonts that are installed by default with Office for Mac are also installed
with Windows versions of Office. So it¹s a safe bet that when you choose
from these fonts, other people will see the same fonts that you see. You can
choose the following fonts with confidence: Arial, Arial Black, Century
Gothic, Comic Sans MS, Copperplate Gothic Bold, Copperplate Gothic Light,
Curlz MT, Edwardian Script ITC, Impact, Lucida Handwriting, Monotype Sorts,
Tahoma, Times New Roman, Verdana, and Wingdings." [Note: Courier New is now
absent]

A radical change has occurred with screen display and fonts in Word 2004.
Unicode fonts are able to display for the first time, and cross-platform
compatibility has greatly improved.

The first thing I observed in Word 2004 was that it uses Times New Roman as
the default font. Now, when a document in Times New Roman goes to Word 2003
on a PC, no font substitution is needed and the document should appear the
same. (If a PC has to open a Mac Word document containing Times ‹ a Mac
font, still included in the suite of fonts for Word 2004 ‹ the PC will
automatically substitute Times New Roman, which takes up different space and
will therefore paginate differently.)

You do not have to use the default font in Word, but unless you set your
Normal template to be something else, in Word 2004 the default font will be
Times New Roman rather than Times.

Times New Roman looks much better when displayed in Word 2004 than it did in
Word 2001, and Times looks much worse, so it makes sense to change over.
Times New Roman is better-looking when printed, too.

The improvements in Word 2004 go far beyond the fonts. Microsoft changed the
way text is laid out on the page to match the way Word 2003 on the PC lays
out its text. The text layout engine has changed significantly (it was
QuickDraw; now it's the Apple text layout for Unicode, called ATSUI) to
accommodate the range of Unicode characters previously unavailable on the
Mac, of which Times New Roman is one, along with Verdana, Trebuchet MS, and
one of the Asian fonts.

If you're still reading down this far: try your text out in Times New Roman
(or another font) and adjust it to your needs without any expectation of
retaining useful spacing etc from New York "as was". ;-)

And yes, you can specify "Exactly" as your line spacing in the Paragraph
command (Command-Option-m).

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is at least 7 hours different from the US and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
============================================================

* A SUGGESTION ‹ WAIT FOR CONSIDERED ADVICE: If you post a question, keep
re-visiting the newsgroup for several days after the first response comes
in. Sometimes it takes a few responses before the best or complete solution
is proposed; sometimes you'll be asked for further information so that a
better answer can be provided. Good tips about getting the best out of
posting are at http://word.mvps.org/FindHelp/Posting.htm (if you use Safari
and it gives you a blank page the first time, you may need to hit the
circular arrow icon -- "Reload the current page" -- a few times).

* AND ONE MORE ‹ AVOID SPAM: To avoid spam directed at contributors of
newsgroups, you can set up a "send-only" dummy e-mail account. Full
instructions are at http://www.entourage.mvps.org/tips/tip019.html

============================================================

In Word X, using format/paragraph/indents and spacing, settings are
single-space and zero points before and after. With these settings, and
an 8 pt. font setting, I could get tight, tight paragraphs; lines
almost touching each other.
In Word 2004, using the exact same settings, Lines are 1/3 to 1/2 the
height of the font away from each other. I've tried manipulating the
Compatibility Preferences with, seemingly, no change. I've even copied
and pasted tight lines from Word X generated paragraph into the Word
2004 document, and lines lose their tightness and separate away from
each other upon pasting. The ONLY difference that I can see is that the
Word X document used "New York" font, which is not available anymore.
Also, this text is inside a text box in both instances.
I know that in some graphics programs their is a feature where line
spacing can be manipulated almost infinitely. I assume this is not the
case with Word?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. A Mermen CD is awaiting it's
Jewel cover and the future of my CD Word design looks grim.

G4/800 10.3.8 Word 11.1.1

Thanks
Arcody

 

[John McGhie [MVP - Word and Word Macintosh]]

If you use a line height of "Exactly", you need to allow for the descenders
in the font. Start with 130 per cent of the font height and see how you go.

If you use a line height of "exactly" you will not be able to place pictures
and things "In line with text" (which is the way you would normally place
graphics) unless you release the line height on the paragraph into which you
place the picture.

A line height of "Single" enables Word to increase the line height if it
needs to, in order to accommodate something larger such as a larger font for
a few characters, or a picture. So does a line height of "At least". The
other line heights are fixed, which makes it more difficult to work (more
manual, if you like).

I only skim-read your original problem, but are you sure you would not be
better off with a line height of "Single" and some Space After? That's the
way Word is designed to operate, and makes things very automatic and
fuss-free

Cheers

Thanks Russell -- it's good to get feedback like that.

A couple of things, then:

1. I *do* have vague recollections of the hazards of selecting "Exactly",
but I can't remember what, since I don't use the setting ("At least" gives
me what I want, since most of my work ends up in Quark XPress by a graphic
designer, or is PDf'd). But if yours is only a small item it should not be
a problem. If you think it may come up in other contexts, post back and I
think Daiya may be able to help, or John McGhie.

2. If you do lots of cross-platform work, look up appendix A in the notes
on the way I use Word for the Mac, titled "Bend Word to Your Will", which
are available as a free download from the Word MVPs' website
(http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/Bend/BendWord.htm). Also do a Find command
for "PC".

[Note: The "Bend Word to Your Will" document is designed to be used
electronically and most subjects are self-contained dictionary-style
entries. Be sure to read the front end if you want to use it further, so you
can use the document to best advantage and select the right settings for
reading it.]

If you are using Word 2004, wait a week or so before downloading it -- a new
version, with a lot of coverage of Word 2004, is imminent. I'll make an
announcement on this newsgroup when it's available.

Cheers,
Clive
=======

Hello Clive,

Thank you so much for your help. Yes, I was still reading down "this
far" and, I must say that I was very much interested. It showed me that
it wasn't the font that was to blame as "tightness" remained in the old
document no matter what font I used; I mentioned "New York" since that
was the exact font used in the doc. Actually, it was the mention of
"Exactly" in the last section that cleared it all up; I had pulled down
that darn little tab with the different values but, had seen "single",
"1.5", and "double" and had dismissed the last 3 values, subconciously,
as just being larger than the last 3 instead of more refined. I skimmed
instead of read. That was the missing bit. All tightened up nicely,
thank you.

I also was not aware of the cross-platform fonts with Windows Word. I
will need this list as I use Windows at work and often have to work on
the same project at both machines and have seen how things can change.
I believe this tidbit will come in handy.

Cheers,
Russell

Hello Russ,

New York was a font designed for use on dot matrix printers in the early
days of the Mac, before laser printers were commonly available. It had very
different design criteria prompted by the spacing of the dot hammers. The
font does not suit most of our purposes nowadays. Times is the nearest
equivalent up to and including Word X (including OS 9 and earlier). But
things changed *radically* in Word 2004. Here's an extract from notes of
mine:

This is what Microsoft says about font compatibility in Word 2004: "The
fonts that are installed by default with Office for Mac are also installed
with Windows versions of Office. So it¹s a safe bet that when you choose
from these fonts, other people will see the same fonts that you see. You can
choose the following fonts with confidence: Arial, Arial Black, Century
Gothic, Comic Sans MS, Copperplate Gothic Bold, Copperplate Gothic Light,
Curlz MT, Edwardian Script ITC, Impact, Lucida Handwriting, Monotype Sorts,
Tahoma, Times New Roman, Verdana, and Wingdings." [Note: Courier New is now
absent]

A radical change has occurred with screen display and fonts in Word 2004.
Unicode fonts are able to display for the first time, and cross-platform
compatibility has greatly improved.

The first thing I observed in Word 2004 was that it uses Times New Roman as
the default font. Now, when a document in Times New Roman goes to Word 2003
on a PC, no font substitution is needed and the document should appear the
same. (If a PC has to open a Mac Word document containing Times ‹ a Mac
font, still included in the suite of fonts for Word 2004 ‹ the PC will
automatically substitute Times New Roman, which takes up different space and
will therefore paginate differently.)

You do not have to use the default font in Word, but unless you set your
Normal template to be something else, in Word 2004 the default font will be
Times New Roman rather than Times.

Times New Roman looks much better when displayed in Word 2004 than it did in
Word 2001, and Times looks much worse, so it makes sense to change over.
Times New Roman is better-looking when printed, too.

The improvements in Word 2004 go far beyond the fonts. Microsoft changed the
way text is laid out on the page to match the way Word 2003 on the PC lays
out its text. The text layout engine has changed significantly (it was
QuickDraw; now it's the Apple text layout for Unicode, called ATSUI) to
accommodate the range of Unicode characters previously unavailable on the
Mac, of which Times New Roman is one, along with Verdana, Trebuchet MS, and
one of the Asian fonts.

If you're still reading down this far: try your text out in Times New Roman
(or another font) and adjust it to your needs without any expectation of
retaining useful spacing etc from New York "as was". ;-)

And yes, you can specify "Exactly" as your line spacing in the Paragraph
command (Command-Option-m).

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is at least 7 hours different from the US and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
============================================================

* A SUGGESTION ‹ WAIT FOR CONSIDERED ADVICE: If you post a question, keep
re-visiting the newsgroup for several days after the first response comes
in. Sometimes it takes a few responses before the best or complete solution
is proposed; sometimes you'll be asked for further information so that a
better answer can be provided. Good tips about getting the best out of
posting are at http://word.mvps.org/FindHelp/Posting.htm (if you use Safari
and it gives you a blank page the first time, you may need to hit the
circular arrow icon -- "Reload the current page" -- a few times).

* AND ONE MORE ‹ AVOID SPAM: To avoid spam directed at contributors of
newsgroups, you can set up a "send-only" dummy e-mail account. Full
instructions are at http://www.entourage.mvps.org/tips/tip019.html

============================================================



On 11/4/05 12:37 PM, in article
(e-mail address removed),

In Word X, using format/paragraph/indents and spacing, settings are
single-space and zero points before and after. With these settings, and
an 8 pt. font setting, I could get tight, tight paragraphs; lines
almost touching each other.
In Word 2004, using the exact same settings, Lines are 1/3 to 1/2 the
height of the font away from each other. I've tried manipulating the
Compatibility Preferences with, seemingly, no change. I've even copied
and pasted tight lines from Word X generated paragraph into the Word
2004 document, and lines lose their tightness and separate away from
each other upon pasting. The ONLY difference that I can see is that the
Word X document used "New York" font, which is not available anymore.
Also, this text is inside a text box in both instances.
I know that in some graphics programs their is a feature where line
spacing can be manipulated almost infinitely. I assume this is not the
case with Word?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. A Mermen CD is awaiting it's
Jewel cover and the future of my CD Word design looks grim.

G4/800 10.3.8 Word 11.1.1

Thanks
Arcody

--

Please reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread. Please do not email
me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie <[email protected]>
Microsoft MVP, Word and Word for Macintosh. Consultant Technical Writer
Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410