Re: space (reply again, sorry)

Thu, 26 Sep 1996 08:22:03 -0500 (EST)

Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 08:22:03 -0500 (EST)
From: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU>
Subject: Re: space (reply again, sorry)
Message-id: <01I9XESTSBMQ007ZO3@SCI.WFBR.EDU>

Peter Flynn <> wrote:
>> I think most people use the &nbsp; in this way as most browsers present it
>> as a space. But is there an entity (now or proposed) that would meet your
>> three requirements? Maybe a non-breaking version of an em-space, etc.?
>That would be <code>&nbsp;</code>, I guess.

	That still doesn't address the ambiguity about its width.  There's
no ambigutity for ensp, emsp, thinsp, etc., but how wide a "blank graphic
character" should be used for nbsp when justification is not being used?
Is it a "non-breaking ensp", or "non-breaking emsp", or what?


 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545