<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://typophile.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>Typophile - On rags and writing styles - Comments</title>
 <link>http://typophile.com/node/44789</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;On rags and writing styles&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Makes sense. But in text</title>
 <link>http://typophile.com/node/44789#comment-275701</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Makes sense. But in text with short words, the opportunity might exist for achieving well-spaced, barely hyphenated justified blocks of text, which when done well can be things of beauty.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 08:57:23 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Ehague</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 275701 at http://typophile.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>On rags and writing styles</title>
 <link>http://typophile.com/node/44789</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;When deciding whether to rag or justify text, how many of you take writing style into account? I’ve found that ragged text can be great for work without a lot of long words, but writing that features longer words can be a real beast to rag well, even with the occasional hyphen. Conversely I find that anything with a lot of proper nouns is a pain to justify because they cannot (usually) be hyphenated. Am I on the right track here?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://typophile.com/node/44789#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://typophile.com/taxonomy/term/5">Design</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 08:46:28 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>James Puckett</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">44789 at http://typophile.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
