Until 4 paragraphs in I was hoping this was a joke. It's 100% arbitrary and based completely on aesthetic judgment. And even though the author explicitly admits this, he's still comfortable condemning anyone who disagrees with him as ignorant and championing his opinion as "the one true way".
I agree with the author, especially since any modern typesetting program should automatically detect a period followed by a space and automatically set the optimum distance for the particular font being used. My biggest pet peeve is people who insist on putting hard returns after every line of text, thereby creating a huge amount of work for anyone who needs to reformat it.
Complaining or arguing about whether one space or two is correct or the "one true way" is just a little bit silly.<p>I figure the vast majority will use which ever way they were taught or that which they are most comfortable with. Me, I use the two space way for no other reason than it is a habit from being taught that way.<p>Some people have far too much time on their hands.
The article just argues by referring to convention, which is rather unfulfilling. It succeeds in pointing out that the two space convention made sense with monospaced fonts.<p>For many of us monospaced fonts are not a thing of the past...