I need to convert a document with one space after each period with two spaces.



I thought a wild card search like this would work:

Find: (<*>.) (<*>)
Replace: \1 \2

(If it's not plainly visible, find searches for a word that ends in a period with one space and the word following. Replace is the first parentheses, two spaces, then the second parentheses.

Track changes are on, and must be.

Although <*> finds single words, my find string finds a string of words. The replace string, instead of putting two spaces between the two arguments, puts two spaces AFTER the second argument, and concatenates the first and second string.

For example:

"Mary had a little lamb. Its fleece was white as snow."

becomes:

"Mary had a little lamb.Its fleece was white as snow."

It appears to work fine when Track Changes are off, so I'm assuming this is a bug associated with Track changes.

Any workarounds?

Thanks

mt

Turn off track changes?

Sorry. Like I said, track changes are on and must be. Client insists.

I'm sure it would be possible to have a macro find and replace, bypassing the Track Changes, but that would be no different from temporarily turning off Track Changes and then perform Find & Replace manually.

__________________
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP

Microsoft 365 apps for business
Windows 11 Professional

What is the point of having two spaces anyway? That is nothing more than a holdover from the days of typewriters with fixed-width characters and double spaces were used to emphasize breaks between sentences.

Furthermore, a Find/Replace cannot differentiate between periods used for abbreviations (e.g. Mr. Smith) and those that delineate sentences.

__________________
Cheers,
Paul Edstein
[Fmr MS MVP - Word]

The client wants two spaces, and they pay. That's the point.

True, but I wouldn't mind doing each one manually if replace works. It would save a lot of keystrokes. As it is, I can search for period, one space, capital letter, but I need three/four keystrokes to place the cursor correctly before manually adding the space.

So, not only do you want a Find/Replace that'll do with job for sentences and abbreviations with tracked changes on, you're then going to add in yet more tracked changes when you manually undo what the Find/Replace has done for abbreviations...

A better course would be to educate the client!

__________________
Cheers,
Paul Edstein
[Fmr MS MVP - Word]

FWIW. For people that care about typography in their writing, two spaces after a period is customary in legal writing. Recently (2014) a legal style guide recommended an em as a compromise. It slight more than a single space, but less than 2 spaces.

Since ordinary spaces have variable widths in justified text and may even vary in width from one font to another, I doubt your "For people that care about typography in their writing" claim has much relevance. Even the non-breaking space has been given a variable-width behaviour in Word 2013 & later. Double-spaces between sentences are a legacy of the days of typewriters and fixed-width fonts.

__________________
Cheers,
Paul Edstein
[Fmr MS MVP - Word]

<I doubt your "For people that care about typography in their writing" claim has much relevance.>
An reply that carries some arrogance. Your are technically correct about mono spaced fonts. People who write using Times Roman probably don't care. However, a reasonable view held by many is that a period is a full stop, a pause to complete a thought. Writing that requires reading comprehension above the 9th grade level is enhanced by two spaces. Some courts still specify it. The Unites States Dept. of Justice Solicitor General Style guide, published only within the last coupe of years, as I recall, suggests a variable font and an em space after a period.
Extra space after a period is still very relevant.
- Cheers

You are entitled to you own view, of course, but I doubt you can point to any such mandated requirement...

__________________
Cheers,
Paul Edstein
[Fmr MS MVP - Word]

As a lawyer, and a person who produces and reads a lot of material using Word, I respectfully disagree. Two spaces in proportionally-spaced text decreases readability. This is especially true if the text is justified.

The 2014 version of the Solicitor General's Style Guide makes no mention of use of an em space or two spaces. That guide is still set for use of monospaced fonts. http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/osg/legacy/2014/04/21/osg-citation-manual-2014.pdf.

Like underlining instead of use of Italics, the extra space after some punctuation is a holdover from use of typewriters. I never use underlining when citing cases or authorities, I use Italics.

Note, you will want to also search and replace for spaces following colons and question marks.

You are right, no mention of spaces after period. If I run across the article I saw, I'll update the post. I did check around one space does seem to be the general trend, although there is a healthy disagreement. Thanks for the correction.

My uncles owned a typewriter business back in the 70s and 80s (Brunson Business Machines). The reason for the double space was the typewriter's limitation. An extremely fast typist would cause the keys to stick together when using only one space. After the advent of the typewriter font ball, followed by word processors and then computers... the need for a double space was not necessary.

Please don't resurrect ancient threads just to add a commentary. In any event, the double-spacing only concerned readability in an era of fixed-width fonts (which is all typewriters can produce). The key-sticking problem actually concerned what would happen if the most-commonly used keys were too close together on the keyboard and explains the traditional QWERTY keyboard layout.

__________________
Cheers,
Paul Edstein
[Fmr MS MVP - Word]