Double line spacing is slightly too small

[Pete Myers]

compare a pdf of sbl class with the sbl student handbook samples, and the line spacing for double spaced lines is slightly too small.

This is harder to fix that at first appears, just because changing the line height will have knock on effects in the class. Perhaps renewing the doublespace command is the best thing to do rather than changing baselineskip or anything else that drastic.

[David Purton (dcpurton)]

Certainly, changing \baselineskip is not a good way to go, since \singlespacing and \doublespacing are the commands to change the spacing when this is needed (e.g., in block quotations, footnotes, bibliography, etc.)

My rough measurements give:
  sblhs baselineskips: singlspacing: 4.75mm, doublespacing: 9.5mm
  LaTeX baselineskips: singlespacing: 5mm, doublespacing: 8.5mm

However, the measurements should be in terms of ex, not mm, since it needs to function correctly in the 10pt footnotes also.

The broader question here is how much is it worth following Word defaults over LaTeX? It seems that you lose some of the beauty of LaTeX as a superior typesetting engine if you try to make it emulate Word just for the sake of it.

Do others have thought here?

If we make it the default for sbl, it would be my preference to leave things as they are for what I do with ridley.

[Pete Myers (petemyers)]

Well... the issue isn't important, so it doesn't need to be decided right away.

For me - I would like LaTeX to typeset things exactly as they appear in the samples given by sbl.

Since it's hard to change the size of things anyway, perhaps there should be an option called "strict", that will ensure a pedantic slavish obedience to sbl examples!

[David Purton (dcpurton)]

On looking at setspace.sty, I don't think that this would be very hard to implement.

Use \SetSinglespace{} to set singe spacing correctly - 0.95 should be about right - but I don't know how the algorithm works.

then renew the \doublespacing command, which is currently defined as:

\newcommand{\doublespacing}{%
  \setstretch {1.667}% default
  \ifcase \@ptsize \relax % 10pt
    \setstretch {1.667}%
  \or % 11pt
    \setstretch {1.618}%
  \or % 12pt
    \setstretch {1.655}%
  \fi
}

My hunch is that Word would use the same for all of them, so you could just try \setstretch{1.8} (double the stretch for single spacing) and see what happens.

Otherwise, trial and error is the way to go.

Put it in an \if@ridley\else\fi construction for now.

I might consider pulling the ridley stuff out into a separate .sty file which could be loaded at the end of the class to fix up anything I don't like. This could provide a better model for adding customisations for other colleges too.

[Pete Myers (petemyers)]

David,

I think pulling the Ridley stuff out into a separate class would be a really
smart idea.

Why don't you do that before I make any other changes?

Oh - btw - don't make too many changes just yet as I have managed to get an
Appendix system working (i.e. puts numbers in if there's more than one
appendices, but doesn't if there's only one appendix).

I'm just trying to tidy up centering, as the second line of the appendix
heading seems to be offset like a new paragraph. Once it's fixed, I'll
commit.

Since \section in appendix is used to mark an entirely new appendix (default
LaTeX behaviour), maybe you were right about our discussion a while ago that
\section should format headings the same way that the \page command does at
the moment.

If we do that, are there enough heading commands to meet sbl guidelines?

Yours
Pete

2009/10/14 David Purton <email address hidden>

> On looking at setspace.sty, I don't think that this would be very hard
> to implement.
>
> Use \SetSinglespace{} to set singe spacing correctly - 0.95 should be
> about right - but I don't know how the algorithm works.
>
> then renew the \doublespacing command, which is currently defined as:
>
> \newcommand{\doublespacing}{%
> \setstretch {1.667}% default
> \ifcase \@ptsize \relax % 10pt
> \setstretch {1.667}%
> \or % 11pt
> \setstretch {1.618}%
> \or % 12pt
> \setstretch {1.655}%
> \fi
> }
>
> My hunch is that Word would use the same for all of them, so you could
> just try \setstretch{1.8} (double the stretch for single spacing) and
> see what happens.
>
> Otherwise, trial and error is the way to go.
>
> Put it in an \if@ridley\else\fi construction for now.
>
> I might consider pulling the ridley stuff out into a separate .sty file
> which could be loaded at the end of the class to fix up anything I don't
> like. This could provide a better model for adding customisations for
> other colleges too.
>
> ** Changed in: sbllatex
> Assignee: (unassigned) => Pete Myers (petemyers)
>
> --
> Double line spacing is slightly too small
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/447269
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of SBL LaTeX
> Drivers, which is subscribed to SBL LaTeX.
>

[David Purton (dcpurton)]

Awesome! I just put an appendices blueprint up earlier today.

I believe there are enough heading commands:

\section = Primary heading
\subsection = First level subheading
\subsubsection = Second level subheading
\paragraph = Third level subheading
\subparagraph = Fourth level subheading

Another advantage of this is that is is more standard LaTeX, so it becomes easier to shift documents between styles, which is an important part of the LaTeX philosophy.

In my blueprint for the table of contents, I noted that using \part for the primary heading and \section will also be an issue. You talked about generally not using \part for an essay, but this does not seem to fit well with the table of contents given in the SBL student supplement.

I will probably not be able to pull out the ridley related stuff until next week.

Even with doing this, I would still vote to as much as possible enable the stye to work in both XeLaTeX and LaTeX - in general I think this should still be fairly straight forward.

[David Purton (dcpurton)]

I've taken the Ridley specifics out, so you should be all good to go.

[Pete Myers (petemyers)]

Ah...

What I meant was hold fire on pulling out the Ridely specific stuff until
I'd commited my appendix changes, it just means I've got to merge them into
your work now.

No worries!

on the \part issue: So... if I've understood you correctly, if you change
the sectino headings to fit LaTeX standard format, what should I use as the
normal heading in my essays?

Pete

2009/10/14 David Purton <email address hidden>

> I've taken the Ridley specifics out, so you should be all good to go.
>
> --
> Double line spacing is slightly too small
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/447269
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of SBL LaTeX
> Drivers, which is subscribed to SBL LaTeX.
>

[Pete Myers (petemyers)]

David,

Please take a look at the appendix code in svn now.

It's all at the end except for a few lines of code that are commented as
being appendix related near the beginning of the file.

If you can shed light on the centering issue, that would be great.

Pete

2009/10/14 Pete Myers <email address hidden>

> Ah...
>
> What I meant was hold fire on pulling out the Ridely specific stuff until
> I'd commited my appendix changes, it just means I've got to merge them into
> your work now.
>
> No worries!
>
> on the \part issue: So... if I've understood you correctly, if you change
> the sectino headings to fit LaTeX standard format, what should I use as the
> normal heading in my essays?
>
> Pete
>
> 2009/10/14 David Purton <email address hidden>
>
>> I've taken the Ridley specifics out, so you should be all good to go.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Double line spacing is slightly too small
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/447269
>> You received this bug notification because you are a member of SBL LaTeX
>> Drivers, which is subscribed to SBL LaTeX.
>>
>
>

[David Purton (dcpurton)]

Oops - Sorry - regarding taking the Ridley stuff out - miss-read you - hope it merged without too much trouble.

I'm going to open a new thread on headings, since I'm not as sure as I was before... and it's probably something good to think through all the implications of.

The Appendix code looks good. I fixed up the alignment and also a problem where all the Appendix text was centred too ;).

BTW, I aften use the \vrule technique to create the two inch top margins because I find it more reliable and it ensures the correct margin is returned on the next page. This could be just because I don't know what I'm doing though... :)

[Pete Myers (petemyers)]

David,

I used the code from the first page of bibliography for the first page of
the appendix.

I figured we'd probably want to implement things consistently throughout the
class. It's just really unhelpful for us down the line if we have several
different solutions to the same problem!

It might be worth checkign that the second page of any particular appendix
formats with a single inch at the top.

I think you're right, though, I'm not sure if "vrule" is the "correct" way.
Before I found your class, I was halfway through implementing my own, and
I'd not used vrule to solve that problem.

That's the beauty of LaTeX though - a number of diferent solutinos can fit.

Pete

2009/10/15 David Purton <email address hidden>

> Oops - Sorry - regarding taking the Ridley stuff out - miss-read you -
> hope it merged without too much trouble.
>
> I'm going to open a new thread on headings, since I'm not as sure as I
> was before... and it's probably something good to think through all the
> implications of.
>
> The Appendix code looks good. I fixed up the alignment and also a
> problem where all the Appendix text was centred too ;).
>
> BTW, I aften use the \vrule technique to create the two inch top margins
> because I find it more reliable and it ensures the correct margin is
> returned on the next page. This could be just because I don't know what
> I'm doing though... :)
>
> --
> Double line spacing is slightly too small
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/447269
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of SBL LaTeX
> Drivers, which is subscribed to SBL LaTeX.
>