dagblog - Comments for "The Rise of "Logical Punctuation""

With periods and commas, it's

acanuck — Sun, 15 May 2011 04:05:29 +0000

In reply to It's funny. After I started

With periods and commas, it's mostly a visual thing. The big problem arises when punctuation that can change meaning -- like ? or ! -- goes on the wrong side of the quote marks.

It's funny. After I started

Michael Wolraich — Sat, 14 May 2011 20:23:35 +0000

In reply to Woohoo, another punctuation

It's funny. After I started coding, I switched to "logical" punctuation in my prose for exactly the reason explained in the discussion of computer programming. Then, sometime after I started blogging, I switched back in order to be more "correct." (Note the period placement.)

I can't really afford to go back to logical now because of the book and CNN stuff, but I'll be glad it if becomes standard in the U.S.

Woohoo, another punctuation

acanuck — Sat, 14 May 2011 19:40:22 +0000

In reply to The Rise of "Logical Punctuation"

Woohoo, another punctuation post! You're a mensch, Genghis.

I hadn't picked up on this supposed trend toward logical punctuation on the web, mostly because the web is all over the map in terms of spelling, punctuation and grammar. Hard to find any rules or consistency at all.

Most Canadian publications endorse neo-British spelling (colour and centre, not color and center -- but tire, not tyre). There's some debate over manoeuvre, as opposed to maneuver. And there are French words that have infiltrated Quebec English -- we say and write confessional schools, not denominational ones. But standard punctuation follows American rules: everything inside the quotes. At dagblog, I've tried to go with the crowd.

Good to know there's a "movement" toward logical punctuation, though. I just may experiment a little.