[necovek]

I imagine this type of formatting caused you to sneak in a typo or two like "free to the render" — if you had it as a free-flowing sentence, it'd be easier to catch.

The point is that if these formatting snippets are useful for reading, we should extend this to all the readers too. If they are not, we should be mindful not to micro-optimize lest we confuse others and ourselves.

[afc]

I actually I'm somewhat torn on this.

In my blog, I do this in my poems, such as: https://alejo.ch/39l — I don't expect this to be controversial, makes sense for poems, right?

However, I'm also experimenting with rendering my prose with the same type of breaks, like https://alejo.ch/3gb or https://alejo.ch/3g9

My guess, reading this thread, is that most people would tell me that they find the breaks annoying and would rather read my prose without the breaks? Hmm. Would love to hear some feedback.

[tolerance]

I’m clearly biased. But I enjoyed the format and it's risk like this that make me more likely to read the content where under different circumstance I may not even care about your professional experiences. The smaller font size mitigates any issues due to the line breaks because I can still see all the text.

Although I can get how someone else would feel that the text is too small and if the size was a conscious decision on your part to accommodate the line breaks they would hold you to blame further.

I think you’ve got a nice personal website overall. Even down to the drafts that lead to 404 errors; a nice touch even if unintentional.

Everybody wants personality to return to the Web again until they’ve got to deal with personalities.

You win some, you lose some.

[afc]

Thank you for responding to my request for feedback, I appreciate it.

[necovek]

It's pretty annoying on a phone screen where there are additional line breaks: I actually lose the flow when I need to skip lines.

Maybe it'll be better on a larger screen, but due to more frequent line breaks, I would advise you to use a serif font.

[tolerance]

Welp. You caught me. And I appreciate your point.

I still might batch process all my notes to break at words up to 72 characters anyway! But I’ll be mindful to where safety goggles and proofread before grinding axes in public.

And I’m leaving the typo above in situ so as not to mislead you that I’m less prone to error under normal circumstances. I’m a WIP.

[necovek]

Not at all my point to "catch" you, just to demonstrate that some of the claimed benefits are not really there.

We all make typos regardless of the editing format: for some cases it might be better to go with these "semantic line breaks", for others not so much.

While an interesting thought experiment, it should be obvious that claims are not objectively true.

Perhaps a full-on scientific study is in order? :)