TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> Is there a reason for this? Have I always been doing it wrong? Are there
> advantages one way or the other? I sometimes have trouble visuallizing how a
> change to style settings will propagate through an entire document and
> interact with other elements, so a general rule of thumb might be helpful. If
> there is one.
It's not unusual to find many people using only one of the spacing options.
There's nothing wrong with using either one, unless you or the people you write
for have problems with the results.
The only drawback I can see is that, by using just one spacing option, you
could lose the chance to ensure that related material is closer together than
other material. For example, a heading should generally be closer to the
material that follow it than the material before as a signal of which it
relates to. However, you don't have to use both spacing options to achieve this
affect - doing so is simply easier.
Another problem is that, when there is space after and space before paragraphs,
some software uses both and some will only use one. However, once you are aware
of this problem, it should cause you no problems.
As for the visualization, many designers set up templates in a rough file so
that they can try them out before using them. You might try doing the same.
--
Bruce Byfield bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com 604-421.7177
