I’m also constantly struggling with using quotes inside quotes, especially when the outer quote ends in the same place as the inner quote. Usually, I just use different quotes (“double” vs. ‘single’ vs. «angle»), but when there are multiple quotes in the same place, it looks ugly no matter what I do.
Angle-quotes seem better in this respect (like nested parentheses, they aren’t ambiguous (because the parentheses have a visually obvious direction, begin-paren vs end-paren, so we can match parentheses to their mates unambiguously)). However, they’re extremely uncommon in American English so I’d feel very weird using them, and also I don’t know how to type them conveniently.
Ideally, I’d want to use multiple sizes of angle-quotes, similarly to the multiply-sized parentheses available in Latex.
Of course, nested … I’m not sure what to call them … whatever this is:
I’m also constantly struggling with using quotes inside quotes, especially when the outer quote ends in the same place as the inner quote. Usually, I just use different quotes (“double” vs. ‘single’ vs. «angle»), but when there are multiple quotes in the same place, it looks ugly no matter what I do.
Angle-quotes seem better in this respect (like nested parentheses, they aren’t ambiguous (because the parentheses have a visually obvious direction, begin-paren vs end-paren, so we can match parentheses to their mates unambiguously)). However, they’re extremely uncommon in American English so I’d feel very weird using them, and also I don’t know how to type them conveniently.
Ideally, I’d want to use multiple sizes of angle-quotes, similarly to the multiply-sized parentheses available in Latex.
Of course, nested … I’m not sure what to call them … whatever this is:
works fine. (At least, it works fine if I edit my stuff on greaterwrong.com instead of lesswrong.com.)