- From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 21:20:59 +0300 (EEST)
- To: www-html@w3.org
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, Ian Hickson wrote: > >> If you have *blocks* of text in which the newlines are important, then it > >> is preformatted text, and the <pre> element is relevant. > > > > Maybe, but <pre> has _four_ components in its meaning: > > - preserve newlines > > - do not wrap > > - preserve spaces > > - use monospace font. > > No, it has one meaning. "The contents have already been formatted and > shouldn't be formatted further". If you say so. This one meaning still has four components, so it is not quite correct to recommend it if you only know that _one_ of those components ("newlines are important") is desired. > In effect it is an "escape" from HTML's > user agent stylesheet. Really? I thought <pre> existed long before style sheets were a reality. > Python and JavaScript are both languages where newlines can affect the > semantics of the code. Python, yes. JavaScript, in part. In any case, <nobr> can be used just for that part of the content where line breaks shall be prevented. > I have lost track of whether you are arguing in favour of <code> and > saying that <nobr> should be deprecated or arguing in favour of <nobr> and > saying that it is not purely presentational (or some other argument). Both > seem to be supported by the paragraph I quoted above, depending on how you > read it. Really? Anyway, I have argued that <nobr> is semantic, and so is <code>, and they are orthogonal. -- Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Monday, 12 April 2004 14:21:01 UTC