Re: To <P> or not to <P> (fwd)

Matthew James Marnell (marnellm@portia.portia.com)
Tue, 20 Aug 1996 18:57:29 -0400


Message-Id: <199608202257.SAA12308@portia.portia.com>
To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: To <P> or not to <P> (fwd) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 19 Aug 1996 14:30:15 PDT."
             <199608192130.OAA29044@server.livingston.com> 
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 18:57:29 -0400
From: Matthew James Marnell <marnellm@portia.portia.com>

:>Technically multiple <BR> tags are supposed to be collapsed to one tag.
:>So <BR><BR> may as well be <BR> - of course, Netscape does not do this.
:>Personally I'd like to see the spec changed to NOT collapse it as it is
:>useful in forcing some whitespace.  But let's put that aside.
:>
:>My point is that some browser may do what is technically correct, and then
:>you won't get the effect you expect.  So using <P> is safer.  The closing
:>tag is optional.  I always use it, but leaving it off is valid.

I only have one question:  When was the last time you operated on
an Adobe Sitemill created document?

I had the misfortune recently.  I probable spent more time fixing it
than I would have if I marked up the text by hand.  Sections that
looked like:

<p>
Paragraph text<br>
<br>
Next paragraph<br>
<br>
[etc]

all indented with multiple <blockquote>s to indent it enough to get past
the background image and carelessly wrapped with <center>s where ever
it seemed to feel good, and all images NATURALSIZEFLAG'ed to death, and
I couldn't figure out if this was Net-escapism or not, as it didn't appear
to have any affect on any version of Net-escape I used.

I can't wait until some of the site authoring "tools" are just a
smidge more thoughful in their markup, or at least allow you to output
multiple documents for multiple browser devises.  It may be too much to
hope for that Site-Ill will support CSS or DSSSL any time soon, not
that the currently most popular browser would care much if it did.

Matt