Re: space (reply again, sorry)

Walter Ian Kaye (walter@natural-innovations.com)
Thu, 26 Sep 1996 06:49:59 -0700


Message-Id: <v03007801ae7039cba363@[205.149.180.135]>
In-Reply-To: <01I9XESTSBMQ007ZO3@SCI.WFBR.EDU>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 06:49:59 -0700
To: www-html@w3.org
From: Walter Ian Kaye <walter@natural-innovations.com>
Subject: Re: space (reply again, sorry)

At 8:22a -0500 09/26/96, Foteos Macrides wrote:
>Peter Flynn <pflynn@curia.ucc.ie> 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?

My understanding is that a nonbreaking space occupies the same width as a
regular numeral (0-9) in the current font.

__________________________________________________________________________
    Walter Ian Kaye <boo@best.com>     Programmer - Excel, AppleScript,
          Mountain View, CA                         ProTERM, FoxPro, HTML
 http://www.natural-innovations.com/     Musician - Guitarist, Songwriter