Re: Some complaints about HTML 4.0

David Perrell (davidp@earthlink.net)
Sun, 13 Jul 1997 12:12:44 -0700


Message-Id: <199707131920.MAA16826@sweden.it.earthlink.net>
From: "David Perrell" <davidp@earthlink.net>
To: "Arnoud \"Galactus\" Engelfriet" <galactus@htmlhelp.com>,
Subject: Re: Some complaints about HTML 4.0
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 12:12:44 -0700

 Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet wrote:
> Well, that's their problem. :-) Shouldn't they be using a stylesheet
> to achieve that kind of visual effect?

Have the properties that can do the job been implemented yet? It would
be nice to have margins and explicit width on inline elements. A few
months ago, MS's goal was a "full CSS1 implementation" in the next
release of IE. I hope they're up to the task.  Then we could apply
style properties to SPACER, right?

> The reason in favor is "non-breaking space is a space, and spaces
> collapse". 

There is logic to that pedantry, but the more useful interpretation
should prevail.

> The problem right now is that you as an author simply *do not know*
> whether <BR><BR> or &nbsp;&nbsp; will collapse or not. This makes
> it next to impossible to use it "properly", because you may very
> well be using an undocumented feature or error recovery side-effect.
> If the spec said "<BR><BR> collapses" or "&nbsp; is not a space,
> it just looks like one", then you could rely on this behaviour.

I agreed that the behavior should be stated in the spec. And since
collapsing multiple consecutive BR and &nbsp reduces functionality and
not collapsing has no negative side effects for authors, neither should
be collapsed.

David Perrell