How to search for ellipses

[Notjohn]

For a print edition, I use a space between the dots (full stops) in an ellipsis. But for the ebook I prefer to have them closed up. But I find that when I search for . . . in Sigil I am taken to the very next sequence of any letter / space / dot / space / letter, such as d a c ("did a creditable job", e.g.).

Surely there's a way around this?

[DiapDealer]

Change the search from Regex mode to "Normal". The "." character has special meaning in regular expressions. If you want to stay in regex mode, then escape the periods with a backslash

\.\.\.

[Turtle91]

With regex I put the optional space in between, and replace with the actual ellipses character: …

search: (\s*\.\s*){2,}
replace: …

this will find any of these:
<p> ..</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>.. .. </p>
.
.
.
Of course you can add spaces before or after the ellipses as desired.

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Notjohn

For a print edition, I use a space between the dots (full stops) in an ellipsis. But for the ebook I prefer to have them closed up.

Why?

If anything, it should be the opposite.

In print, you have full control over the font/spacing/justification/line-breaking.

In ebooks, the ellipsis character is very inconsistent. (Especially when dealing with the "4-dot ellipsis".)

For more info on all that, see:

• 2017: "break/no-break and other spaces"
  
  • I show period vs. ellipsis in different fonts.
• 2019: "ellipses, with or without spaces?"
• 2013: "[old thread] non breaking spaces (* and *) automatically removed"

Originally Posted by Turtle91

With regex I put the optional space in between, and replace with the actual ellipses character: …

search: (\s*\.\s*){2,}
replace: …

this will find any of these:
<p> ..</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>.. .. </p>
.
.
.
Of course you can add spaces before or after the ellipses as desired.

I have an 11-step ellipsis "Saved Searches" I came up with years ago:

Step | Search          | Replace
_____|_________________|____________
1    | …               | ...
2    | \.\.\.\.        | . . . .
3    | \.\.\.          | . . .
4    | \.\. \.         | . . .
5    | \. \.\.         | . . .
6    | “\. \. \.\s*    | “. . . 
7    | \s*\. \. \.”    | . . .”
8    | <p>\. \. \.\s+  | <p>.&nbsp;.&nbsp;.&nbsp;
9    | \s+\. \. \.</p> | &nbsp;.&nbsp;.&nbsp;.</p>
10   | \. \. \. \.     | .&nbsp;.&nbsp;.&nbsp;.
11   | \. \. \.        | .&nbsp;.&nbsp;.

Steps 1->5. Looks for various combinations of periods/spaces and normalizes everything into "period + space + period" form.

6+7. Attaches ellipsis + open/closing quotation marks.

8+9. Attaches ellipsis + beginning-/end-of-paragraph.

10. Find 4-dot ellipsis.

11. Find any 3-dot ellipsis that hasn't been touched yet.

* * *

Usage Notes

Steps 1->5

I've learned you can't trust any user input.

Authors accidentally use combinations of "..." + "…" within the same text.

And too many times OCR, AutoCorrect, or these "Smart Punctuation" algorithms botch the ellipsis character.

This helps normalize everything.

Steps 6->9

Depend on a manual decision.

Some authors prefer a space before/after, others prefer the ellipsis with no space.

• “… Okay.” vs. “…Okay.”
• “Okay …” vs. “Okay…”

Steps 10+11

Definitely requires case-by-case decisionmaking.

Over the years, Jellby has written extensively on all the various combinations of ellipses that can occur (there's at least 5):

• .… vs. ….
  
  • Period + Ellipsis vs. Ellipsis + Period?
• “Okay… I just wanted you to go away.”
  
  • A long pause, or dialogue drifting off.
• Much as the Arctic tern migrates yearly from the Arctic to the Antarctic?… The epidemics could have origins of two sorts, one from beyond the equator, another from nearer home.
  
  • Other Punctuation + Ellipsis.
• As the journalist wrote: “The brawl expanded into … terror and mayhem.”
  
  • Removed text in the middle of a long quote.
• As the journalist wrote: “The brawl expanded into […] terror and mayhem.”
  
  • A more European-style of removed text.
    
  • (I absolutely love this, and it makes much more sense. )
    

You can't just do a mass search/replace.

You have to decide if/where you're going to use the ellipsis character + if/where it should get attached.

Side Note: After this, you'd probably want to also look for two periods in a row:

• \. \.
• \.\.

This is an example..

(This is a very common typo. It even snuck into the latest book I converted.)

If your book is full of links like:

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../Styles/stylesheet.css"/>

you may want to adjust those regexes slightly:

• \w\. \.
• \w\.\.

Hopefully that'll catch them all.

And again, a case-by-case basis. The author may have meant just a period, or they may have meant an actual ellipsis.

[Notjohn]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Change the search from Regex mode to "Normal".

Brilliant! Thank you. I'd never noticed that option before.

[Turtle91]

There are definite issues using the "spaces between dots" technique especially when using text-to-speech or other accessibility functions:

Originally Posted by jackie_w

I agree. I listen to books using text-to-speech quite often. Early in my ebook experience I realised that 'dot dot dot' was all too often read aloud as 'dot dot dot'. It sounded like the book was being narrated by a woodpecker! I've been making sure that all my books use proper ellipses ever since.

Of course if you're only producing books for yourself you can do whatever you like.

I understand that the actual ellipses character display changes with the font selected... but isn't that the point? Don't you want the ellipses to be internally consistent with the font being used. If it looks inconsistent, then the font wasn't designed very well, wasn't it?

Personally I never use 4 dots, or ellipses plus a period, or period plus an ellipses (in a book, mind.....I get completely carried away in a post...... ):

1) I would completely expect the ellipses and period to look different in ANY font...they're not the same character... to prevent them from looking silly together, just don't use them together.
2) it just seems silly to use 4... why not have 5 dots..... or 6-9 dots ....... (6-9 dots could just be 3 ellipses together!)
3) and yes, some can say 4 dots is the same as ...? or ...!, but I don't have any problem ending a sentence with an ellipses

Anyway, not trying to cause an argument...there are plenty of threads that do that....... just making sure people realize this isn't JUST about personal preference........ it can have accessibility impacts.

Cheers!

[Turtle91]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

...

• \w\. \.
• \w\.\.

...

Brilliant! I won't have to step through one-at-a-time anymore - thanks!

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Notjohn

Brilliant! Thank you. I'd never noticed that option before.

Nice. Although it's really a headscratcher. We've been talking about that dropdown for years.

And you've been on Regex mode this entire time?

You may want to doublecheck some of your previous books for errors. You may have accidentally unleashed a rogue regex while searching/replacing other things.

Example. In Regex, the symbol:

. = Any character

so you may have done a search/replace for:

P.T. Barnum

but in Regex mode, that would look for:

P + any character + T + any character + space + Barnum

It's why we typically put warnings in the "Regex Examples" thread to not "Replace All".

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Brilliant! I won't have to step through one-at-a-time anymore - thanks!

Although that regex would then miss the typo " ..When" but hopefully you have a grammarchecker or something else that catches that.

... I've spent too much of my life correcting all these ellipsis issues, so the more time I can save everyone else, the better!

Originally Posted by Turtle91

There are definite issues using the "spaces between dots" technique especially when using text-to-speech or other accessibility functions:

Not all TTS says "dot". Most just pause between periods.

And I'd say this is heavily outweighed by an ellipsis on a line by itself (bad line-breaking):

I said this is an example
…

(Remember that line-breaks happen MUCH more often in ebooks compared to print. Think cellphone screen, very thin/tall.)

Originally Posted by Turtle91

I understand that the actual ellipses character display changes with the font selected... but isn't that the point?

No. A properly designed ellipsis should seamlessly fit with periods (in both spacing/size).

For more ellipsis typography info, see Robert Bringhurst: "The Elements of Typographic Style":



(Also look closely at his examples on the side.)

Chapter 5.2.7. Use ellipses that fit the font.

Most digital fonts now include, among other things, a prefabricated ellipsis (a row of three baseline dots). Many typographers nevertheless prefer to make their own. Some prefer to set the three dots flush … with a normal word space before and after. Others prefer . . . to add thin spaces between the dots. Thick spaces (M/3) are prescribed by the Chicago Manual of Style, but these are another Victorian eccentricity. In most contexts, the Chicago ellipsis is much too wide.

Flush-set ellipses work well with some fonts and faces but not with all. At small text sizes – in 8 pt footnotes, for example – it is generally better to add space (as much as M/5) between the dots. Extra space may also look best in the midst of light, open letterforms, such as Baskerville, and less space in the company of a dark font, such as Trajanus, or when setting in bold face. [...]

In English (but usually not in French), when the ellipsis occurs at the end of a sentence, a fourth dot, the period, is added and the space at the beginning of the ellipsis disappears…. When the ellipsis combines with a comma, exclamation mark or question mark, the same typographic principle applies. Otherwise, a word space is required fore and aft.

In Print, many typographers manually create ellipses by using periods + thin spaces between. So this:

…

should look the same as:

. + . + . (Tight)
. + THIN SPACE + . + THIN SPACE + . (Loose)

and this:

.…
….

should look the same as:

. + . + . + . (Tight)
. + THIN SPACE + . + THIN SPACE + . + THIN SPACE + . (Loose)

(In ebooks, these "rarer spaces" have many problems, so I'd avoid using them. &nbsp; is your safest bet.)

Originally Posted by Turtle91

If it looks inconsistent, then the font wasn't designed very well, wasn't it?

Exactly.

So ebook users fiddling around with all different types of fonts, you're going to get a mess.

In Print, you have full control over the visuals, so if the font's ellipsis/kerning sucks, you can always work around it. (And manually adjust.)

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Personally I never use 4 dots, or ellipses plus a period, or period plus an ellipses (in a book, mind.....I get completely carried away in a post...... ):

It's used very often in Non-Fiction.

When you cut text in a quotation and the quotation actually begins/ends in a period. This is why you get:

….
…?
…!

In the European-style, this "cut text" is more easy to spot:

[…].
[…]?
[…]!

What causes confusion is trying to overload the ellipsis + gobble up punctuation.

Side Note: I just answered this one on Reddit a month ago:

/r/writing: "How do you use Ellipses with other punctuation?"

The person tried to argue for a "..?" or a ".?!" (where all 3 dots merge).

Another example:

TeX Stack Exchange: "Typesetting exclamation+question+ellipsis (!.. ?.. ?!. !?.)"

(Over the years, I've even seen some try to use a double-dot ".." instead of an ellipsis: "A..Z".)

Originally Posted by Turtle91

2) it just seems silly to use 4... why not have 5 dots..... or 6-9 dots ....... (6-9 dots could just be 3 ellipses together!)

The 4-dot ellipsis has its purpose, very common in Non-Fiction.

5+ dots were used in the past to show "lots of text missing". Modern books don't really use this, but old books do. And in inconsistent fonts, the ellipsis character + 2-or-more dots looks even more ridiculous.

(Hence one of the reasons why I completely normalized to PERIODS + NON-BREAKING SPACES, since it can consistently handle any # of dots + any mix of punctuation before/after + any font! And no line-breaking issues!)

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Anyway, not trying to cause an argument...there are plenty of threads that do that....... just making sure people realize this isn't JUST about personal preference........ it can have accessibility impacts.

Hence links to many of the previous ellipsis threads.

All the pros/cons have been discussed many times over the years.

[Turtle91]

Thanks for your, quite extensive, reply! I'll only reply to a few things, because everyone is welcome to their opinion and I'm not trying to change yours!

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

...

And I'd say this is heavily outweighed by an ellipsis on a line by itself (bad line-breaking):

I said this is an example
…

(Remember that line-breaks happen MUCH more often in ebooks compared to print. Think cellphone screen, very thin/tall.)

This could happen any time you have a space between items. It is not peculiar to the ellipses. To prevent it from being orphaned either use an &nbsp; before the ellipses character, or don't use a space at all.

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

No. A properly designed ellipsis should seamlessly fit with periods (in both spacing/size).

For more ellipsis typography info, see Robert Bringhurst: "The Elements of Typographic Style":

{ATTACHMENT}

That graphic kinda proves my point. There are uneven spaces between the dots and the commas. It does look evenly spaced with the 4th period and the ?!, but I don't necessarily agree that it is a requirement to be such. The old typesetters only used multiple periods because they didn't have a specific ellipses symbol in their toolbag. If they did you would definitely have a space between the ellipses and ?!, or even a 4th period.
What is wrong with a slight space between an ellipses and a ,.?! they are different characters after all:

(all of these use the ellipses character, not dots)

end of a sentence. …Beginning of another.
end of a sentence… Beginning of another.
This has some clipped … in the middle.
I wonder,… what do you think of…?
Well…, you should think of…!

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

So ebook users fiddling around with all different types of fonts, you're going to get a mess.

The only time there should be a "mess" is if the eBook creator is using different fonts within the sentence... and yes, I have seen that... *shudder*.

My point is that a decent font should be consistent with itself. The ellipses should look good and have proper size/width/spacing compared to the other characters in that font.

Yes, there are "bad" fonts that make them look bad, but isn't that the beauty of ebooks? If you don't like the font you're using, you can change it to something else. If a font is internally inconsistent, then ... don't use it...! I can't force a user to think something is pretty ... and I wouldn't want to even try. I try and keep things as simple and as semantically correct as possible while letting the user determine what font they enjoy reading with. I also am trying, certainly with a long way to go, to be as accessibility conscious as I can.

Even if only 42% of the devices out there say "dot" or pause before a period then I would consider that a much greater "sin" than having a slight difference in spacing between an ellipses and a .?!

Again, just my .02¢

Cheers,

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

This could happen any time you have a space between items. It is not peculiar to the ellipses. To prevent it from being orphaned either use an &nbsp; before the ellipses character, or don't use a space at all.

On some ereaders, the bad linebreak occurs before/after an ellipsis with NO space.

For example:

This is an example…”
This is an example….
This is an example.…

could display as:

This is an example…
”
This is an example…
.
This is an example.
…

I believe GrannyGrump (and others) noted that in those older ellipsis threads.

[Turtle91]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

On some ereaders, the bad linebreak occurs before/after an ellipsis with NO space.

For example:

This is an example…”
This is an example….
This is an example.…

could display as:

This is an example…
”
This is an example…
.
This is an example.
…

I believe GrannyGrump (and others) noted that in those older ellipsis threads.

lol! Both of those would not be a problem if you didn't use the period in conjunction with an ellipses! The splitting of a ” (or !, or .) onto a new line is just the sign of a bad reader/app - especially if there isn't a space between the character and punctuation. It's like they are treating an ellipses as a non-character or a space. I would imagine those bad ereaders also exhibit issues with bad hyphenation??

In any case, a bad ereader that doesn't display something properly is beyond the realm of a book designer's control. If those people USING those bad ereaders actually notice this small issue...and actually care enough about it... then they can change to a different reader. Yes, there are publisher's customers out there that are uber nitpicky, and of course they want their book to look good on as many devices as possible, but the spacing between an ellipses and a ,?! probably isn't really even noticeable to the 99.99% that are NOT typesetters themselves. The sin of "bad accessibility" certainly would outweigh it in any reasonable person's mind.

I think we are definitely getting into the realm of ... and most definitely past the point of how to search for an ellipses!

Cheers!

[AlanHK]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

I understand that the actual ellipses character display changes with the font selected... but isn't that the point? Don't you want the ellipses to be internally consistent with the font being used. If it looks inconsistent, then the font wasn't designed very well, wasn't it?

Often the ellipsis is designed to be the same width as a figure, so it can be used in tables easily, so columns of figures line up. Which is much too narrow for people who like to use it in text.

In text I use .&nbsp;.&nbsp;. and .&nbsp;.&nbsp;.&nbsp;.
Would prefer to use thinner spaces, but those allow the ellipsis to split on a linewrap. I tried all the various space entities and in ebooks, only nbsp could be depended on to be "no break".

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by AlanHK

Would prefer to use thinner spaces, but those allow the ellipsis to split on a linewrap. I tried all the various space entities and in ebooks, only nbsp could be depended on to be "no break".

The NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE (U+202F), which is used in French, would be perfect (since it's a thin space that doesn't break)... but that has horrible support in tons of fonts/programs.

For all that info, see 2020: "Non-breaking spaces in ePUB".

[DNSB]

My personal preference for faking ellipses is the Word Joiner ( U+2060) though you run into the same lack of support as with the Figure Space and Narrow No-Break Space.

[AlanHK]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

The NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE (U+202F), which is used in French, would be perfect (since it's a thin space that doesn't break)... but that has horrible support in tons of fonts/programs.

Yeah, I was excited to see that. Then I tested it and every reader happily split regardless.

In my print layout I have edited the kerning between periods to about a half normal space so I just type ... and I get a nicely spaced ellipsis that does not break inside.