- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 12:11:39 -0400
- To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:08 AM, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:53 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> We're not trying to be fancy here, just sync up our definitions of >>> "basic whitespace". This isn't about all the various typographic >>> types of whitespace used in text, just the types of whitespace that >>> show up in documents to separate elements and such. That's just the >>> ascii space (U+0020), ascii tab (U+0009), and the three ascii line >>> feeds (U+000A, U+000C, and U+000D). >> >> NBSP is extremely common for showing up in documents to separate elements and such. Mostly where it's not desired, often because of the way it got typed into some editor. I think it should be included. It's not a request to be fancy. It's really very basic and common. > > Also, if some bozo used it as a faux indent, that shouldn't prevent meaningful use of :first-letter. If one goes beyond ASCII at all, I really don't see a good reason not to include all Unicode whitespace characters. And with my author hat on, I think selectors probably *should* consistently use "all Unicode whitespace characters" as their definition of white space. (I might make an exception for U+0085, which is almost certainly *not* NEXT LINE but a mistranscode of ELLIPSIS.) zw
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2015 16:12:10 UTC