- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 00:18:35 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Christoph P?per wrote: > Ian Hickson (2010-12-07): > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2010, Christoph P?per wrote: > >> However, I believe the underlying problem is simply that ?line break? > >> is (too) often used and understood as a synonym for ?new line?, at > >> least by non-native speakers. Speaking of breaks on line or paragraph > >> level therefore makes more sense to me. > > > > I don't really understand the difference. > > Here comes a *line break* > that always means a visual *new line* > like here, whereas a *break on line level* // may look differently > ? and may actually be rendered with orthographic possibilities (dashes, parentheses etc.) instead of markup, when they?re textual content, not structure. I still don't understand what you mean here. > >>> (A "minor logical break inside a paragraph" is not generally > >>> represented by a line break, at least not in any typographic > >>> conventions I've seen; usually, in my experience, those are denoted > >>> either using ellipses, em-dashes, or parentheses.) > >> > >> That?s true for real paragraphs, but not for most ?non-paragraphic? > >> texts, e.g. addresses. > > > > The lines in an address are separate "oral lines", not "minor logical > > breaks inside a pragraph". > > Addresses (with multpile lines) are a concept native to written, not to > spoken language. Certainly addresses are, for their intended purpose, always written down, but that doesn't mean they're never read out. But I don't see how this affects this discussion. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 16 May 2011 17:18:35 UTC