Re: space

Stuart Young (nakor@glasswings.com.au)
Wed, 25 Sep 1996 20:54:32 +1000 (EST)


Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 20:54:32 +1000 (EST)
From: Stuart Young <nakor@glasswings.com.au>
To: Walter Ian Kaye <walter@natural-innovations.com>
cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: space
In-Reply-To: <v03007801ae6ea4a3740d@[205.149.180.135]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960925204935.29832A-100000@fizzgig.glasswings.com.au>

On Wed, 25 Sep 1996, Walter Ian Kaye wrote:

> At 3:16p +0100 09/23/96, Peter Flynn wrote:
> >   >Isn't this what <PRE> is all about?
> >
> >   When I wrote "transmitting source code", what I really meant was
> >   "transmitting *pretty-printed* source code". (Sorry I left that out.)
> >
> ><pre> does this as far as I know. Or did you mean "source code
> >pretty-printed and designed to be displayed in a proportional font"?
> 
> Yes; proportional fonts do aid in prettifying; boldfacing and italicizing
> as well.

I personally would NEVER want to see source code in a proportional font.

Ever seen Assembler source printed in a proportional font? It loses all 
the hard-formatting it has, and simply makes something harder to understand.

Some constructs are 'better' in a mono-spaced font.

However, wether it's legal to use <I>, <B> or the like in a <PRE> block 
is another matter, as I can DEFINATELY see a use for Italics and Bold 
text in this sort of way. 

/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)  - You may be human, but you're still animals! |
| nakor@glasswings.com.au - Man is territorial. Violence is our response.  |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------------/