[alt.folklore.computers] Coding in lowercase - references?

gerlekm@merrimack.edu (11/12/90)

Help -

Some time ago, on one of these groups, yet another discussion occurred
on whether programs should be coded in upper or lower or even mixed
case letters.  Someone claimed that lower case was better, because our
eyes are more trained ("used to") to lowercase letters -- does anyone
have a reference for this, or any related studies?

One of my profs thinks I'm making this up, and I need proof :-)
Thnaks in advance.

[  M.P.Gerlek, Wanna-Be At Large
[  Disclaimer: Yes, Mom, I'll play nice.
[  {uunet,bbn,ulowell}!samsung!hubdub!mpg
[  "Speaker-to-workstations."

parks@BINAH.CC.BRANDEIS.EDU (11/16/90)

>Some time ago, on one of these groups, yet another discussion occurred
>on whether programs should be coded in upper or lower or even mixed
>case letters.  Someone claimed that lower case was better, because our
>eyes are more trained ("used to") to lowercase letters -- does anyone
>have a reference for this, or any related studies?

     Well, I haven't a reference for this, but, hey, this is
alt.FOLKLORE.computers, so why should I let a lack of hard facts slow
me down.  :^)
     The way I remember the story, IBM did a study on the comparative
readabilities of upper- and lower-case text.  It was found that lower-
case text was the more readable, so they figured to do everything in
lower-case (this would have been in the days of card punchers 8-O and
those had but one case available).  The punch-line (heh heh) to this
story is that someone asked what they would do for the word "God".
ZAP!  Better to have GOD than god, so EVERYTHING will be done in upper-
case.

			Camden "Snake-Oil" Parks

new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) (11/16/90)

>Someone claimed that lower case was better, because our
>eyes are more trained ("used to") to lowercase letters 

Actually, I think it is more because the lowercase letters
have more variance between them, not because we are more
used to them.  For example, t and i are much more different
than T and I.  Similarly for e/f and E/F and so on. Words
like "different" can be recognised just by the shape of
the letters without actually looking at all the letters
themselves, and this leads to greater reading speed.
I also remember hearing that this is the reason for
ligatures.             -- Darren
-- 
--- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware ---
----- Network Protocols, Graphics, Programming Languages, 
      Formal Description Techniques (esp. Estelle), Coffee, Amigas -----
              =+=+=+ Let GROPE be an N-tuple where ... +=+=+=

rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (11/17/90)

parks@BINAH.CC.BRANDEIS.EDU writes:
>      Well, I haven't a reference for this, but, hey, this is
> alt.FOLKLORE.computers, so why should I let a lack of hard facts slow
> me down.  :^)

Fair warning.  (Well, one of the two targets is ...folklore...)

>      The way I remember the story, IBM did a study on the comparative
> readabilities of upper- and lower-case text.  It was found that lower-
> case text was the more readable,...

AArrgghhh!!! Why do the legends always have it that IBM invented/discover-
ed/studied everything???

It's long-established knowledge in typography that lower case is more
readable...it probably far predates IBM's very existence.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd       Boulder, CO   (303)449-2870
   Cellular phones: more deadly than marijuana.

dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) (11/18/90)

In article <1990Nov17.013754.10134@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>parks@BINAH.CC.BRANDEIS.EDU writes:
>>      The way I remember the story, IBM did a study on the comparative
>> readabilities of upper- and lower-case text.  It was found that lower-
>> case text was the more readable,...
>
>AArrgghhh!!! Why do the legends always have it that IBM invented/discover-
>ed/studied everything???
>
>It's long-established knowledge in typography that lower case is more
>readable...it probably far predates IBM's very existence.

Exactly.  Thanks Dick.

As a matter of fact, this arcane knowledge predates the invention of moveable
type.  What we call "lower case" letters are the calligraphic descendents of 
the old Roman capitals you see on government buildings.  In the centuries-
long battle between legibility and space efficiency, legibility finally won
when paper became cheap, and the *most legible* standard hands (humanist
bookhand and Italic) were used as the models for most European type designs.
(The big exception was Germany, where the illegible Fraktur script was used).

What we call upper-case letters are the descendants of versal initials, adapted
to conform to the style of a particular lower-case hand (*not* the other way
around).  It would have been unthinkable, in the 15th century, to set text in
all upper-case letters for more than one or two words.

-- 
         David M. Tate          |   Concord and time, each needeth each:
   dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu      |   The ripest fruit hangs where not one
  "A Man for all Seasonings"    |   But only two can reach.
      scapegoat-at-large        |  		--William Plomer, "Gloriana"

floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) (11/18/90)

In article <61679@unix.cis.pitt.edu> dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:
>In article <1990Nov17.013754.10134@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>>parks@BINAH.CC.BRANDEIS.EDU writes:
>>>      The way I remember the story, IBM did a study on the comparative
>>> readabilities of upper- and lower-case text.  It was found that lower-
>>> case text was the more readable,...
>>
>>AArrgghhh!!! Why do the legends always have it that IBM invented/discover-
>>ed/studied everything???
>>
>>It's long-established knowledge in typography that lower case is more
>>readable...it probably far predates IBM's very existence.
>
>Exactly.  Thanks Dick.
>

No.  The point got missed.  The fact that something was discovered/
invented/researched to death or whatever some hundreds of years ago
certainly would not stop IBM from discovering/inventing/researching
it to death again, and 1) finding the truth was true, and 2) doing
it the wrong way anyway.

(Sorry for the IBM bashing, but 1) its fun, and 2) that was the
point of the original post... IMHO).

Floyd


-- 
Floyd L. Davidson   floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu    floydd@chinet.chi.il.us
Salcha, AK 99714    connected by paycheck to Alascom, Inc.
When *I* speak for them, one of us will be *out* of business in a hurry.

greg@hoss.unl.edu (Hammer T. H.) (11/19/90)

... parks@BINAH.CC.BRANDEIS.EDU forgets to attribute the following:

>>Some time ago, on one of these groups, yet another discussion occurred
>>on whether programs should be coded in upper or lower or even mixed
>>case letters.  Someone claimed that lower case was better, because our
>>eyes are more trained ("used to") to lowercase letters -- does anyone
>>have a reference for this, or any related studies?

In writing ACOS code for my BBS, I have come to the decision on having all
commands in lowercase and all variables in caps, public labels in caps,
and regular labels in lowercase.  To me it makes the code much more
readable, much better than the programs I see where the programmer felt
that every command must begin with a capital letter.

Each language has its conventions.  Pascal for having constants in CAPS
and other variables in lower/mixed case.  I even got into the habit of
using different captialization of my begin and end statements.  If it is
the begin and end for the main program, they are BEGIN and END.  If they
are for procedures/functions, they are Begin and End, and otherwise as
begin and end.  Other things with Pascal I did was:

 procedure x (y, z: integer);

 Begin
   .
   :
   if ... then begin
     .
     :
   end else begin
     .
     :
   end;
   .
   :
 End; (* x *)

I won't bother going into any other languages right now.  I fell asleep
after 3 AM last night with a can of C__e and a bag of D_____s.

--
     __  _____________  __
     \ \_\ \__   __/ /_/ /    "I'm working the Eight Minus Zero Shift..."
      \greg@hoss.unl.edu/     "Eight Minus Zero Shift?"
       \_\ \_\|_|/_/ /_/      "Yup, the Happiness Patrol."

dab@Oswego.EDU (David Alan Bozak) (11/29/90)

In article <20517.273e9e6b@merrimack.edu> gerlekm@merrimack.edu writes:
>Help -
>
>Some time ago, on one of these groups, yet another discussion occurred
>on whether programs should be coded in upper or lower or even mixed
>case letters.  Someone claimed that lower case was better, because our
>eyes are more trained ("used to") to lowercase letters -- does anyone
>have a reference for this, or any related studies?
>
>One of my profs thinks I'm making this up, and I need proof :-)
>Thnaks in advance.
>
>[  M.P.Gerlek, Wanna-Be At Large
>[  Disclaimer: Yes, Mom, I'll play nice.
>[  {uunet,bbn,ulowell}!samsung!hubdub!mpg
>[  "Speaker-to-workstations."

It is true, in general.  Upper case letters have a high degree of
confusability - check most any good perception handbook and you will
find a fair amount of research on this.  There are simply few
distinguishing features available to your perceptual system, especially
relative to the larger number of features available in lower case
(or mixed case).  So lower case should be easier to read if your
measurement is speed and accuracy.

On the other hand, there are certainly other factors at work - perceptual
set (expectations) and the like.  Overall, however, for speed and
accuracy (and likely less fatigue over time), lower case should be
preferable.

(I don't have references on reading at hand, but try D. E. Rumelhart,
1970, A multicomponent theory of perception of briefly exposed
visual displays, _Journal of Mathematical Psychology_, volume 7,
191-218.  That ought to get you to a better reference.)

-dab

         /\           David Alan Bozak, Computer Science Department
        /  \          SUNY College at Oswego, Oswego, NY  13126 (315) 341-2347
  _____/____\_____    Internet: dab@rocky.oswego.edu                     
 /    /      \    \          or dab%rocky.oswego.edu@nisc.nyser.net     
/____/        \____\  UUCP: {cornell!devvax,rutgers!sunybcs}!oswego!rocky!dab

tomr@ashtate (Tom Rombouts) (12/04/90)

In article <1990Nov28.193148.1300@oswego.Oswego.EDU> dab@oswego.Oswego.EDU (David Alan Bozak) writes:
>In article <20517.273e9e6b@merrimack.edu> gerlekm@merrimack.edu writes:
>>Help -
>>
>>Some time ago, on one of these groups, yet another discussion occurred
>>on whether programs should be coded in upper or lower or even mixed
>>case letters.  Someone claimed that lower case was better, because our
>>eyes are more trained ("used to") to lowercase letters -- does anyone
>>have a reference for this, or any related studies?
>>
>It is true, in general.  Upper case letters have a high degree of
>confusability - check most any good perception handbook and you will
>find a fair amount of research on this.  There are simply few

My personal, entirely un-scientific opinion on this:

In the xBASE world, source code traditionally appears in uppercase,
although most implementations of the language are not case sensitive.
Thus, I am quite familiar with this debate.

Despite the various cited research, uppercase can be easier to read
for the simple reason that since the letters are bigger, they can
be read from a greater distance than the same text in lowercase.

In a simple test that I just conducted, I could comfortably read
all caps source on a printout from about 20", while for lowercase
it had to be about 16" or closer.

Thus, from this point of view, uppercase is more readable than 
lowercase.  I am only posting this because this factor seems to
be ignored in most discussions/debates on this topic, not to suggest
that uppercase is better.


Tom Rombouts  Torrance Techie  tomr@ashate.A-T.com  V:(213)538-7108

ed@alt.dah.sub.org (Ed Braaten) (12/08/90)

tomr@ashtate (Tom Rombouts) writes:

>My personal, entirely un-scientific opinion on this:

>Despite the various cited research, uppercase can be easier to read
>for the simple reason that since the letters are bigger, they can
>be read from a greater distance than the same text in lowercase.

If you are having trouble *seeing* your listings then maybe you 
should pass them through banner on their way to the printer... ;-)
But seriously, reading is made easier by using a character set
which can be easily perceived.  As the research shows, using
upper-case-only doesn't usually meet that goal for most people. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------
      Ed Braaten        |  "... Man looks at the outward appearance, 
Work: ed@de.intel.com   |  but the Lord looks at the heart."              
Home: ed@dah.sub.org    |                        1 Samuel 16:7b
--------------------------------------------------------------------

wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) (12/12/90)

>>My personal, entirely un-scientific opinion on this:

>As the research shows, using
>upper-case-only doesn't usually meet that goal for most people. 


As an uppercase-only hater, I'd love to see the research. But
despite the subject on the thread, I'm still looking for cites.

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.....wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu 
& no one will talk to a host that's close............(305) 255-RTFM
Unless the host (that isn't close)......................pob 570-335
is busy, hung or dead....................................33257-0335